Back to Post
| Username | Post: This proves that Covid can be managed at Universities |
|---|---|
|
Streamers Professor Posts 8257 
|
11-21-20 02:20 PM - Post#317154
At least ones with a semi-isolated campus and ample resources like 5 Ivies |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
11-25-20 11:33 PM - Post#317323
I have to say, though, that I'm watching the onslaught of games on tonight and I just don't get it. This can only end badly. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
11-26-20 07:00 PM - Post#317337
After watching a very good Gonzaga team beat Kansas in Fort Myers with some people in the stands and several other games w/o people in the stands, it is disappointing that there will be no IL BB this year. It makes one wonder if the IL should have at least given it try as the IL or any league could shut it down if need be. Time will tell if the IL decision makers made the correct decision. They obviously have more information than we have but ..... |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
11-26-20 08:18 PM - Post#317341
There have been 37 games cancelled over the first two days of the season. While there have been far more that have actually been played, I just can’t imagine that the Ivy League would have wanted to be party to that (granted it likely wouldn’t have been, as it probably would have held to conf only play, and I’m not sure that, for instance, Yale would have made it back into a phase where it could have played by now anyway). If the extent of things ends up being just scheduling inconvenience (games being cancelled/postponed), then Ivy fans may indeed regret not playing this season, but just imagine if they start tracing cases back to on-court spread and the like. It’s just a lot of risk to mitigate regardless of whether the rest of D1 ends up getting away with it relatively unscathed. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
11-26-20 09:31 PM - Post#317342
As the LA Times article suggests, some universities have handled the situation very well and others have not. A reasonable question exists if the IL schools could have effectively managed thru the COVID crises without relying on remote learning. An easy answer might be simply say no versus a more nuanced approach. As to playing basketball, it is probably even more debatable but the IL decision makers might have made the correct call although it will be interesting to see what happens to Northeast basketball teams over time. |
|
Streamers Professor Posts 8257
|
11-27-20 10:14 AM - Post#317357
Aside from the sports aspect, I think the schools that have managed to deliver a more normalized college experience this year for the same money as those who have not have a significant academic recruiting advantage, at least for the near future. I know it would impact my thinking as a college student parent if I were considering that decision now. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
11-27-20 10:58 AM - Post#317360
A friend's son was deciding on which law school to attend. It came down to 3 good law schools in the Northeast with pros and cons for each school. At the end of the day, he picked the school most likely to have classroom learning. Fortunately, he made the correct call although there was an element of luck. Most of his classes have been in the classroom and not remote. He could not imagine being a 1st year law student with all classes being remote. His experience between classroom and remote learning confirmed his selection criteria. Schools, like the Ivies, that clearly have the resources might have taken a different track but it is what it is. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
11-27-20 11:25 AM - Post#317361
Aside from the sports aspect, I think the schools that have managed to deliver a more normalized college experience this year for the same money as those who have not have a significant academic recruiting advantage, at least for the near future. I know it would impact my thinking as a college student parent if I were considering that decision now. As the parent of two high school senior boys, it has been a very challenging process. It has probably been even worse for my sons. We were only able to visit one campus in person, and that tour was strictly outdoors. So no sense of what the "student experience" is like, especially when, for the most part, at least a portion of the students are not even on campus and you can't spend any time with the ones who are there. And really no way to assess at this point what it will be like come the fall. One thing is for sure--if things are pretty much status quo then for sure they will be enrolled in a SUNY school (which they might end up enrolling in anyways even if things get more "normal") because there is no way we are paying private college tuition if all learning will be online. |
|
Streamers Professor Posts 8257
|
11-27-20 11:54 AM - Post#317362
Fortunately, he made the correct call although there was an element of luck. Most of his classes have been in the classroom and not remote. He could not imagine being a 1st year law student with all classes being remote. I have a nephew who is a 1-L who wholeheartedly agrees with this. |
|
Streamers Professor Posts 8257
|
11-27-20 12:01 PM - Post#317363
And really no way to assess at this point what it will be like come the fall. One thing is for sure--if things are pretty much status quo then for sure they will be enrolled in a SUNY school (which they might end up enrolling in anyways even if things get more "normal") because there is no way we are paying private college tuition if all learning will be online. In some ways, I feel your pain. My college soph. is having a rough time spending what will be (at least) 18 months at home after one enjoyable year of the traditional college experience. After taking a couple of 'cheap' online transferable courses this semester, she has decided to re-enroll at her school and go the online route for the spring. She learned the hard way that not all online experiences are created equal. Not saying SUNY would be sub-standard, just that there are many SUNY campuses and programs, and it pays to be discerning about online programs & courses as well. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
11-27-20 12:32 PM - Post#317364
I hear you. At this point, my kids have experienced both fully remote and fully in-person (with masks) instruction, as well as Zoom in-person (with masks) in high school in certain classes. They don't love any of the options, and frankly I cannot blame them. They've had about the best you can have in terms of these kinds of experiences (at least from a school doing what it can, and our being able to provide the resources for our kids to leverage technology for them) and it has still taken a tremendous toll on them in various ways. So from my perspective, even the best of the online options in college will be far less than ideal. It certainly would not justify paying private college tuition. They are both applying to a few SUNY schools in any event, and would have even had COVID not existed. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
11-27-20 01:57 PM - Post#317367
Definitely apply and pursue things as normal. It’s very, very likely the world will be pretty safe and normal by fall 21-22 classes. And if it isn’t, most schools allow for a gap year, but at least the college of choice would be locked in. Transferring in is much tougher than applying out of high school in most cases. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
11-27-20 03:39 PM - Post#317371
Agreed. Of course, the conundrum with any gap year option (not that my boychicks are terribly interested in one at the moment) is that the more impacted the college experience, the more impacted the gap year experience as well. Their school normally spends two months during senior year in Poland and Israel. This year, if their school is able to go at all, it would only be to Israel and they would have to build in the first two weeks as mandatory quarantine time. At any rate, that would serve as some gap year/transition time. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
11-28-20 09:38 AM - Post#317380
More from a handful of Ivy players: https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sports/high-s... |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
11-28-20 10:13 AM - Post#317381
I will never understand the unwillingness to put together an Ivy Bubble. We will lose the majority of our upperclassmen, and will trend down 100 spots or more when we get on the court again. But I'm not looking to restart the argument other than saying that the consequences of being the only conference to sit it out will be lasting. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
11-28-20 10:54 AM - Post#317383
I have a number of friends who were very surprised that the IL did not even make an attempt to start up the season and a bubble would have been a conservative approach. The money was always there to give it a try and they could have always shut it down if need be. I think of a player like Llewellyn who was strongly recruited to play at his father's university, Wake Forest, but decided on the Tigers. He probably is thinking about playing beyond college and this year will be a wasted year for him from a BB perspective. I wonder what he is thinking but he seems like an outstanding young man. IL decision is going to set back IL BB in the short-term and we will see about the intermediate term. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
11-28-20 11:12 AM - Post#317384
I don’t understand the premise of this “setback†narrative. It would be one thing if we had players transferring that had 21-22 Ivy eligibility remaining, but so far, that hasn’t happened. The seniors entering the transfer portal would have entered regardless, as they’ll have NCAA eligibility if they played this year or not, but wouldn’t have Ivy eligibility either way. Transfers like Forrest and Cambridge left prior to COVID-19. And the 2021 class is basically locked in, and I haven’t heard of any decommits over the decision not to play. Maybe there will be an impact on the 2022 class, but I doubt it as the NCAA remains in a dead period, so it’s not like folks in that class can be visiting for games on unofficials. Certainly things can change, and if they do, then we can discuss the impacts of a talent drain, but so far, the only net effect is that 21-22 will be slightly better than it otherwise would have been, as Yale should be stronger with Swain using his final year of eligibility in 21-22. As far as I know, Llewellyn would have missed substantial time this year regardless and would have thusly likely had a grad year to spend elsewhere anyway. And it would have been extremely difficult to set up an impermeable bubble in any realistic way. It’s a nice theoretical idea, but much more difficult in practice than the hand wavy support for it here. |
|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
11-28-20 01:03 PM - Post#317387
I think you are presuming that talent has the same value regardless of whether a player gets to play this season. While the Ivies will in a sense have two classes coming in at once in 21-22, for everyone else in college basketball, they will be getting the same number of incoming recruits between the 2 years, and half of them will have a season of division one basketball. We often see the biggest jump for for players between freshman and sophomore years. We won’t be getting that jump next year. It doesn’t just magically happen at that age. It involves playing your first year of college basketball and getting the training and support that comes with it. So for this year’s freshman, they will be in a sense a year behind. So the talent of this year’s class will in a sense be diminished, at least for a time. I also think you may be applying the usual understanding of how incoming players replace graduating minutes each year. I think a lot of the statistical assumptions are based on a world where the seniors graduate every year. In other words, everyone has minutes to replace. Next year, that won’t be the case. With some very limited exceptions for guys going to the NBA, everyone else is going to return just about everyone. Only the Ivies will have minutes to replace. This should actually be good for recruiting, because we will have less of a log jam than other schools. More kids will have an opportunity to play right away in the Ivy League for the next couple of years than in any other conference. But short term that will not be good for oncourt results. |
|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
11-28-20 01:35 PM - Post#317388
Is Langborg saying he will leave early? He said he would have two years of eligibility as a grad transfer. While he missed some time last year, he was nowhere close to a medical redshirt. If he plays his junior and senior years at Princeton, it looks to me like he should only have one year left. Or am I misinterpreting how eligibility this year works? I thought that essentially this year doesn’t count toward eligibility, and everyone in school right now gets 4 years besides this year. Langborg’s statement could mean that everyone in school right now get five years of eligibility, with this year counting as one of the five if you play. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
11-28-20 02:28 PM - Post#317390
I'm not sure either, tbh. Doesn't make sense to me where that extra year is coming from, but he'd obviously be in a better position to know than I. As for your other point... it's certainly fair to say that there might be a one-year bump to the overall quality of college basketball by having more seniors hanging around, but ultimately, beyond that the scholarship limits are what they are, so the world should come crashing back down on those schools by 22-23. So, in the ultra-short-term (21-22), the Ivies could be disadvantaged by other schools being temporarily better, but that should come back around with schools being less experienced in 22-23 and/or having a tougher time recruiting because they don't have available scholarships. The Ivies were taking a step back anyway, because the 2016 class was so much more talented than the classes around it. With the talent the league brought in for 2020 and 2021 and the potential advantage it could have in a more limited scholarship environment in 2022, it's hard to argue that taking a year off delayed the reload to get back comfortably into the mid-teens or better as a league after a brief step back. |
|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
11-28-20 03:26 PM - Post#317391
Of course I hope you are right. Do we know what the scholarship situation will be? I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they expand the number of scholarships for a couple of years so as not to force choices that would negatively impact the financial/educational situations of players. That of course presumes schools are in a financial position to give out extra scholarships. And even if they went up to, say 15 scholarships instead of 12, there would still be a playing time crunch. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
11-28-20 06:03 PM - Post#317393
By definition, this BB season is a set back for the IL if all other conferences get through the season with some hiccups along the way. Conversely, if the season is cancelled by most conferences with no NCAA Tournament, it will be a very different story line. Perhaps, Jaelin will be heading off to Wake Forest with only 3 years playing for the Tigers or perhaps he heads off to Europe after graduating from Princeton. Unfortunately, Tiger fans will probably only see him for one more season versus two. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
11-28-20 08:14 PM - Post#317398
I think the chances of the NCAA allowing schools to have more than 13 scholarships are about as strong as the chances the IL votes to have basketball this year. Revenues are declining due to Covid, they aren't looking to spend more money. I think that's a non starter. And the transfer rules are going to ultimately benefit the IL as more and more schools are recruiting experienced players from the transfer portal than they are HS players. IL will ultimately benefit from that trend, which is increasing not decreasing |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
11-28-20 09:01 PM - Post#317400
I remember reading early on that the scholarship limits wouldn’t change except that any returning seniors to their specific team would be exempted from the limit. But to the extent that *everyone* is getting an extra year, the limits wouldn’t be expanded beyond next year for returning seniors. I believe I read it in the context of some football coaches complaining about the fact that even though the expanded limits would help next year, at some point down the line, the extra year for everyone would create a scholarship pinch. I don’t have confirmation that’s how it will work for basketball, but if it does, then 2022 recruiting would be the first year we’d see a benefit, as an extra year of the current juniors would be in the system with no extra scholarships to compensate. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
11-29-20 09:29 AM - Post#317411
At the end of the day, IL administrators view sports very differently than many of their peers. I am sure that the vast majority of their peers are also extremely concerned about COVID but their sports programs, partially due to economics but also due to the culture of these institutions, view athletic endeavors differently. A former IL coach recently shared with several of us, some of the internal barriers that existed during her tenure. There is a legitimate argument as to what is right and wrong as to where athletics fit at each university and conference but it will be very challenging for IL BB to reach the next level with the existing philosophy. Fortunately, IL BB is blessed to have coaches like Jones, Amaker, Henderson, Morris, Donahue etc. who can overcome some, not all, of the institutional barriers. The decision to be the one conference to cancel BB before the start of the season says a lot. Other schools/conferences may ultimately shut BB down although time will tell. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
11-29-20 08:49 PM - Post#317438
IL decision to shut down basketball was not based on purely Covid safety. It's clear Covid can be managed as it has happened and is happening while still allowing sports. They never entertained it as an option despite having the expertise, the resources and the clear template on how to do it. It's clearly not a priority which is consistent with past decision making. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
11-29-20 10:31 PM - Post#317439
C’mon. That’s just a tad harsh. There are a long list of things that I’d love to see the presidents drop their resistance to because they tend to be impactful to athletic achievement with minimal academic downside. But this situation is just a choice between a ton of bad options. Hard to fault them or tie it to areas where they do seem to express ignorance of the needs of athletics. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
11-29-20 11:31 PM - Post#317442
IL decision to shut down basketball was not based on purely Covid safety. It's clear Covid can be managed as it has happened and is happening while still allowing sports. They never entertained it as an option despite having the expertise, the resources and the clear template on how to do it. It's clearly not a priority which is consistent with past decision making. Is it being managed or does the NFL just operating under DGAF? Because the Ravens don't seem to be managing anything and the Broncos game was an embarrassment. OTOH, the one thing I think has not been captured well by those who want a shut down of athletics is that the players' and coaches' feelings (not just their health) should have been considered more. I would bet most would have liked to risk playing and we've denied them that agency. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
11-30-20 01:02 AM - Post#317444
C’mon. That’s just a tad harsh. There are a long list of things that I’d love to see the presidents drop their resistance to because they tend to be impactful to athletic achievement with minimal academic downside. But this situation is just a choice between a ton of bad options. Hard to fault them or tie it to areas where they do seem to express ignorance of the needs of athletics. It would be easier to agree with you if they considered any of the "bad" options before deciding. But the hay was in the barn well before the vote. There was no debate or consideration so it clearly wasn't about athletics. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
11-30-20 01:06 AM - Post#317445
No clue what DGAF means but I am taking your post generally as a joke right? I mean you do understand the difference between managing and avoiding right? If you don't want sports just go the IL route and send em all home. No one can avoid the virus completely. Last I checked, the 3 Denver QB's was on those guys. They decided they were better than everyone else and didn't follow protocols. After their selfish decision, they were isolated. That's called managing a situation. I can't say I have any insight into what the Ravens did to get infected, but their response as a team and the NFL's protocols have "managed" the situation. If you play, you are gonna have situations. The IL said "let's not bother" and EVERYONE else said, "we can manage this. |
|
westcoast Senior Posts 302 |
11-30-20 01:14 AM - Post#317447
The priority for the Ivy League is to give students the opportunity to return to campus for academics. Athletes will not be brought to campus (or sent to bubbles) until all students have the opportunity to return to campus. Once that happens, then sports can be considered. |
|
Quake Show Junior Posts 218 |
11-30-20 04:07 AM - Post#317451
As a current student with many friends who are athletes at Penn, I can assure you that while the decision to cancel sports is tough - their respective seasons aren’t the sole priority for most athletes themselves, and so it’s inappropriate to treat basketball as such. Most students are presently concerned with being able to come back to school at all and receive the quality education we all worked so hard to earn. While sports is a major factor and motivator for Ivy athletes, don’t forget that they are more than athletes: they are intelligent students who understand the real risk covid poses to themselves and the surrounding community, and how athletes are uniquely positioned to be vectors of the virus given the existing/future protocols of these schools in the face of said virus. I empathize with your frustrations - I too would love to see Ivy basketball this year - but Ivy student athletes are more than their sports, more than a product, which cannot really be said for some scholarship athletes at many other schools. It is important as alumni and fans to recognize and remember that, and appreciate why the league would come to the decision it did. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
11-30-20 09:27 AM - Post#317457
DGAF is Don't Give a F... The NFL put on a non competitive game, potentially risking players livelihoods in a game that was a sham because the show had to go on. They also somehow got 18 people on the Ravens sick (some of whom are obese and at higher risk). I'm not even that against playing. But I would not point to what the NFL is doing as a model of anything. I would not point to what the AAC did making Temple play with like a 7th string QB as managing anything. In both cases, it seems like they are putting "the game" above the people. And again, I'm quite aware that it's not 18 people sick in the Ravens case vs 0 if they didn't play. When the virus is raging in the community, players are going to get sick even if they don't play. At least in this case they are getting paid. Now what the Quake Show says surprises me. I would think the players wanted to play and if you polled them, that's what they'd vote for and pretty overwhelmingly. I have to defer to him though in the absence of any evidence. |
|
Streamers Professor Posts 8257
|
11-30-20 09:56 AM - Post#317461
As a current student with many friends who are athletes at Penn, I can assure you that while the decision to cancel sports is tough - their respective seasons aren’t the sole priority for most athletes themselves, and so it’s inappropriate to treat basketball as such. Most students are presently concerned with being able to come back to school at all and receive the quality education we all worked so hard to earn. While sports is a major factor and motivator for Ivy athletes, don’t forget that they are more than athletes: they are intelligent students who understand the real risk covid poses to themselves and the surrounding community, and how athletes are uniquely positioned to be vectors of the virus given the existing/future protocols of these schools in the face of said virus. I empathize with your frustrations - I too would love to see Ivy basketball this year - but Ivy student athletes are more than their sports, more than a product, which cannot really be said for some scholarship athletes at many other schools. It is important as alumni and fans to recognize and remember that, and appreciate why the league would come to the decision it did. I quoted all of this so people could read it again. I was pretty sure this would be the majority sentiment, but having a current student put it out there is a welcome perspective on this board. As badly as I feel for those athletes who have worked so hard only to lose their seasons, I feel this was the correct call. OTOH, I’m not convinced that every IL school has completely brought their resources and expertise to bear in an attempt to educate their students in the optimal manner given the pandemic. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
11-30-20 10:32 AM - Post#317470
The one thing I think everyone who supports this decision misses is that it is precisely the fact that students are not allowed on campus that made a bubble possible. Once students are on campus, a bubble cannot work. Notwithstanding Mike's statement about how complicated it is, I disagree that sending the 8 teams (mens' and womens') to Cornell and using their dorms and eating facilities in a bubble is all that complicated. They all can do their school work just as everyone else is doing it--virtually. And the fact that as someone pointed out, the decision was made before any real consideration of a bubble was attempted makes it pretty clear that the decision was made for appearances. I support the decision not to play a regular schedule. I think it would have been worth it to have our athletes participate in the only sports where we compete at the highest level and money is involved. |
|
Streamers Professor Posts 8257
|
11-30-20 12:50 PM - Post#317481
I think it would have been worth it to have our athletes participate in the only sports where we compete at the highest level and money is involved. I can think of several other sports where we compete at the "highest" level (Lax, soccer, wrestling, even fencing) and hoops does not make enough money to matter. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
11-30-20 01:00 PM - Post#317482
I'm talking spectator sports, but I should have included hockey as well. And most of the sports you mention are not winter sports, anyway. A one and done NCAA spot is worth $282,000 which probably exceeds the cost of the bubble or at least makes it close. |
|
Quake Show Junior Posts 218 |
11-30-20 01:38 PM - Post#317484
I’m just curious as to why hoops is the sport that gets the exception to be in the above hypothetical bubble up at Cornell. There are literally thousands of winter/spring sport athletes across all eight schools. Are we supposed to deny some a season while others get one? Not even Power 5 schools are doing this - most sports are being given a chance to play if at all possible. I think that’s a key consideration that puts the equity and feasibility of an Ivy bubble into questions. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
11-30-20 01:49 PM - Post#317485
because the other sports don't matter. I'm sorry you had to hear that from me. But it's true. This isn't the ALLSPORTS-U board after all. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
11-30-20 01:52 PM - Post#317486
Basketball and hockey are different than the other sports in that they actually can bring in paying customers, have a real fan base and have a possibility of positive revenue. Penn Basketball is the signature athletic program at Penn. I don't buy this "fairness" doctrine as if we have to treat all students or all athletes the same. They're not, and the recruiting for basketball players and hockey players at the schools that have hockey is at a very different level than other sports. As I mentioned, basketball has the ability to pay for itself if it were to go to a bubble. Other than hockey, which has much higher costs, no other sport is even close to revenue neutral, nor does it have fan bases around the country. It's just not a real comparison with squash, gymnastics, fencing, or even baseball or football (which has MUCH higher costs and is a revenue destroyer). Now sitting here on a basketball site, I may not be typical of all fandom and I have recognized repeatedly that the student body is very different than when I attended Penn in the '70s (I know from my daughter, who is Class of '15), but if the only reason that we didn't do a basketball bubble at Cornell when everyone is taking class virtually that it isn't fair to others, I think that is ridiculous. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
11-30-20 02:33 PM - Post#317487
The Executive Director did not mention fairness when interviewed by ESPN after the announcement. She was not asked about having a short season bubble between the fall & spring semesters and did not offer that information on her own.
11-15-20 02:26 PM - Post#316749
Freddie Coleman of ESPN interviewed Robin Harris (9 minutes long) about the cancelled season. https://cms.megaphone.fm/channel/ESP1407137613? sel... When asked about a bubble (4 minutes mark), Harris said that a season long bubble was not feasible since the student athletes live and interact with other students. She did not expand on that answer or mention anything regarding cost, logistics or fairness with the other winter sports. After her short bubble answer, she said they talked about travel for a team to go to another Ivy school on a charter bus creating a 'modified travel bubble'. With schools restricting travel for everyone, it was also determined not to be feasible. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
11-30-20 02:53 PM - Post#317488
No, she gave no reasons. I'm responding to a specific argument made here. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
11-30-20 04:23 PM - Post#317490
I decided to experience self-inflicted pain and listen to the 9 minute interview and try to understand what really drove this decision. Robin did reinforce the notion that the decision came from within the university community (academic) and then reached the athletic teams. There was no attempt to look as to how to carve out athletic teams and then look at the effect, if any, on the university community. It simply reinforced the notion that athletic teams are second or possibly third in line. She also mentioned that it is a lot of work to carve out the athletic teams and let them play. I thought about the notion that there are simply no good choices so therefore being the only conference to cancel justifies the end. I believe that the opposite holds true that you need great leadership to deal with extremely challenging situations and develop a thoughtful, rational approach similar to the Dukes of this world. I highly doubt that Robin is the type of person who brings a contrarian view to the IL President's table for careful thoughtful analysis but maybe I am wrong. Her track record regarding IvyMadness is self-explanatory both from decision making and communication . Some of my non-IL sports enthusiasts are really not surprised at all as their comment is that after all, it is the IL. Robin finally commented that IL fans will come back in force after this season. Let's check back on her grip on reality. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
11-30-20 04:24 PM - Post#317491
I decided to experience self-inflicted pain and listen to the 9 minute interview and try to understand what really drove this decision. Robin did reinforce the notion that the decision came from within the university community and then reached the athletic teams. There was no attempt to look as to how to carve out athletic teams and then look at the effect, if any, on the university community. It simply reinforced the notion that athletic teams are like the dog wagging its' tail. She also mentioned that it is a lot of work to carve out the athletic teams and let them play. I thought about the notion that there are simply no good choices so therefore being the only conference to cancel justifies the end. I believe that the opposite holds true that you need great leadership to deal with extremely challenging situations and develop a thoughtful, rational approach similar to the Dukes of this world. I highly doubt that Robin is the type of person who brings a contrarian view to the IL President's table for careful thoughtful analysis but maybe I am wrong. Her track record regarding IvyMadness is self-explanatory. Some of my non-IL sports enthusiasts are really not surprised at all as their comment is that after all, it is the IL. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
11-30-20 04:36 PM - Post#317492
I decided to experience self-inflicted pain and read your two identical posts .... but seriously, I'd understand that better (and especially the leadership in the cancel dept by Harvard) if we hadn't seen Harvard invest more in its program than the rest of the league combined in the past 10 or so years. Harvard obviously deeply cares about basketball and wants to play and win at basketball. So if we're talking about a relative pittance to play in a bubble for 6 or so weeks, it's all about the look. This isn't last year--we know a lot more now and an option exists to make it safe. It's just seen as bad PR, despite the fact that showing everyone else how to do it right could be a PR bonanza. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
11-30-20 06:05 PM - Post#317495
Pretty funny - apologize for the eye strain. |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
11-30-20 06:35 PM - Post#317497
Therein may lie our disconnect. Basketball predominates the pysche at Penn, especially circa 1970's. Cornell cares about hockey. Harvard has only recently come to rally around basketball. When I was there in the 80's I attended far more hockey games. For most of the Ivy League today, I can't fathom that a single sport would be segregated out for 'special' treatment, especially when there are students not on campus. That is why I couldn't conceive of a basketball only bubble even being considered, feasibility be damned. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
11-30-20 07:37 PM - Post#317498
Who cares about the fans? Harvard has spent MILLIONS on basketball in the last 10 years, from Amaker's package which is more than twice what any other Ivy coach makes, the improvements to their arena (albeit they should have gotten far more for their money) and the willingness to lower the bar for their basketball team in terms of academics. We all know that Harvard has no fans. But their boosters and administration contribute the big bucks, yet they ran away from a solution that would get exposure and possibly admiration |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
11-30-20 07:40 PM - Post#317499
That’d be a great New York Post article. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
11-30-20 09:03 PM - Post#317500
In pictorial form only. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
11-30-20 10:23 PM - Post#317501
In fairness, Boston/Massachusetts, has experienced significant challenges with COVID which would make Harvard very cautious, perhaps more cautious than the majority of IL universities. But, there is a element of politics that probably comes into play with Harvard and other IL schools based on their culture. I would not have been surprised if Harvard and perhaps one other IL school would have taken a pass if 6 other schools were willing to give it try but it is understandable that you need to have all teams in a conference participate or not. It appears that cancellations due to COVID has slowed down over the past few days but who knows for sure where this is going but the IL could have certainly given it the old college try. They could have shut it down if need be. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
11-30-20 11:37 PM - Post#317502
Any sane and rational individual who has been following the data and trends since March knows exactly where this is headed. December and January will be our country's worst COVID months, period. We already have more people hospitalized due to COVID than ever before, and the spikes are frightening in too many places around the country. Daily fatalities will be between 2,000 - 3,000. Health care systems across the nation are going to get overwhelmed. Some already are. We haven't yet hit the spikes due to Thanksgiving or the one to come after Christmas-New Years. |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
12-02-20 09:56 PM - Post#317550
What are you waiting for? I'm seeing <200,000 new cases and almost 3,000 deaths reported today. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
12-02-20 10:39 PM - Post#317551
What are you waiting for? I'm seeing <200,000 new cases and almost 3,000 deaths reported today. Yes, and this is still partial data due to reporting issues before, during and after Thanksgiving weekend. What's not partial is 100,000 hospitalized--that number is much less affected by the holiday reporting issues. The numbers we will see at this point next week will make the current figures look quaint. That will incorporate many of the new cases resulting from exposure around Thanksgiving. Oh, and a student from my boychicks' grade tested positive for COVID today. So the two of 'em are quarantined for the next little while since they both have a class with the affected student. The entire senior class will now be learning remotely since all but about 9 students have at least 1 class with the affected individual. Those 9 students are not subject to the quarantine, however. It's getting worse and will continue to deteriorate for the next few months. Spring should show significant improvements for any number of reasons, but that's still a long ways off. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
12-08-20 03:39 PM - Post#317735
From Nicole Auerbach of The Athletic https://mobile.twitter.com/NicoleAuerbach/status /1... Larry Scott says the Pac-12 is looking into bubble environments/mini pods for basketball, "but you have to be very very vigorous about it." Said he's not sure it is appropriate to do over a prolonged period of time for "student-athletes." 2:00 PM · Dec 8, 2020·Twitter Web App |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
12-08-20 04:03 PM - Post#317741
I would agree IF the students were attending class. But they are not. What difference does it make if you take virtual class from Cornell for 6 weeks or from home? |
|
Old Bear Postdoc Posts 3998 |
12-08-20 05:16 PM - Post#317758
What are you going to do for timers, referees, etc.? Are they going to stay in the bubble? Given the current rise in cases, I find it hard to believe that college and/or Pro competition can make it through December |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
12-08-20 05:22 PM - Post#317760
Simple answer--yes. Offer a little more money and they won't risk their health, unlike every other game. This REALLY wasn't going to be rocket science. It just comes down to the fact that they wanted to spin the fantasy that the players are like all other students and it wouldn't be fair to the athletes in other sports who wouldn't get to take part. We could have done this easily. |
|
Old Bear Postdoc Posts 3998 |
12-08-20 06:47 PM - Post#317771
Any time spent in Ithaca in the winter is more than too much. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
12-08-20 06:50 PM - Post#317772
I am watching Wagner playing Seton Hall with no sighting of Bryce which is unfortunate. Obviously, a lot of games are being played with a fair number of cancellations but college BB is moving forward. Maybe, it all changes in the coming weeks but we will see. It also appears that the vaccine is right around the corner although doubtful that college BB players will receive it until March. IL remains the odd ball but time will tell if they got it right or wrong. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
12-08-20 06:57 PM - Post#317773
MA is adding more restrictions. My guess is that NY will not be far behind. |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
12-08-20 09:58 PM - Post#317775
Successful completion of NCAA season basketball season is dubious. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
12-08-20 10:54 PM - Post#317776
Short of a bubble, I would tend to agree. Of course, anything's possible if teams, leagues and the NCAA simply don't care how many people come down with the virus. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
12-09-20 12:16 AM - Post#317778
In terms of college cases, the NYT is keeping a data base of positive cases. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/c ovid-... Here are a number of schools with more than 6% of its students testing positive. It doesn't seem that any of them had enough negative comments/pressure (from students, alums, the general public) for them to regret their decisions. Auburn University - 2,079 (est. 30,500 undergrads & grad students) 6.8% of students University of Alabama - 3,219 (38,000) 8.5% University of Colorado - 2,236 (37,500) 6.0% University of Florida - 5,008 (52,500) 9.5% University of Georgia - 4,387 (39,000) 11.2% University of Illinois - 3,892 (34,000) 11.4% University of Indiana - 3,754 (43,250) 8.7% Purdue University - 2,700 (44,500) 6.1% Iowa State - 2,169 (33,500) 6.5% University of Iowa - 2,749 (31,250) 8.8% University of Kentucky - 2,845 (29,500) 9.6% Miami (Ohio) - 2,368 (19,500) 12.1% Ohio State - 4,665 (60,500) 7.7% Oklahoma State - 2,167 (24,000) 9.0% Penn State - 4,353 (47,250) 9.2% Clemson - 5,086 (26,000) 19.6% University of South Carolina - 3,037 (35,500) 8.6% University of Tennessee - 2,022 (29,500) 6.9% Texas Tech - 2,697 (39,000) 6.9% BYU - 2,993 (34,500) 8.7% University of Wisconsin - 4,193 (45,250) 9.3% |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
12-09-20 02:23 PM - Post#317803
It's not just the students, it's the impact/spread in the community. Not to blame the crazy rise in cases on just colleges, but it has to be part of the picture. |
|
mobrien Masters Student Posts 402 |
12-09-20 05:51 PM - Post#317810
It sure sounds like Coach K wants to pause the season. As Duke goes... https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketba ll/story... |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
12-09-20 06:09 PM - Post#317811
I'm already seeing 4 cancelled or postponed Top 25 games alone tonight, 12 total in all of DI. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
12-09-20 09:18 PM - Post#317818
Everyone is an genius. It was obvious that only conference bubbles would work, yet not a single conference tried it. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
12-09-20 10:24 PM - Post#317824
A lot will depend on whether the network partners would want a May Madness property versus a March Madness one in terms of delaying the season. If they don’t, it’ll be full steam ahead with making March work. And for the bigger conferences with lucrative TV deals, it wouldn’t surprise me if it ultimately led to bubbles. |
|
Go Green PhD Student Posts 1149 |
12-10-20 09:28 AM - Post#317835
Everyone is an genius. It was obvious that only conference bubbles would work, yet not a single conference tried it. The PL is attempting a minimal-travel, unbalanced-conference only schedule. That's as close to a bubble as it gets. We will see if that works... |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
12-10-20 03:24 PM - Post#317871
Short of a bubble, I would tend to agree. Of course, anything's possible if teams, leagues and the NCAA simply don't care how many people come down with the virus. They clearly don't. At this point the national positivity rate is (gulp) 11% with a 7 day average of over 200,000 daily cases. 7 day average of over 2,200 fatalities, and that's gonna start spiking since yesterday we went over 3,000 and today it looks like we're headed closer to 3,500 than 3,000. Over 106,000 currently hospitalized. What's it going to take? Some high profile coach not just coming down with COVID but dying from it? 5,000 deaths a day? |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
12-10-20 09:00 PM - Post#317908
It sure sounds like Coach K wants to pause the season. As Duke goes... https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketba ll/story... No more OOC games for Duke going forward. Let's see if that triggers more moves. |
|
SRP Postdoc Posts 4911 |
12-11-20 04:27 AM - Post#317920
The Alabama coach’s reaction to Coach K was priceless. |
|
SRP Postdoc Posts 4911 |
12-11-20 04:29 AM - Post#317921
The obvious solution for a set of IL campuses that have switched to remote learning would have been remote basketball. A video game simulation of basketball wouldn’t be that different from a Zoom simulation of a classroom. |
|
Silver Maple Postdoc Posts 3777 |
12-11-20 04:45 PM - Post#317951
The Alabama coach’s reaction to Coach K was priceless. Shocking. Nate Oats doesn't give a sh1t about the safety of his players. Knock me over with a feather. |
|
mobrien Masters Student Posts 402 |
12-12-20 04:45 PM - Post#317970
A Florida player who had previously had covid collapsed on the court today, and is currently in critical condition. We don't know what happened with him yet, but it seems like myocarditis is a real possibility. https://twitter.com/charlesppierce/status /13378306... |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
12-12-20 08:30 PM - Post#317985
I'll leave it to those more experienced in reading these documents to see if this player, who tested positive for covid in the summer, would have had cardiovascular testing done prior to the start of pre-season practice. SEC MEDICAL GUIDANCE TASK FORCE REQUIREMENTS FOR COVID-19 MANAGEMENT: FALL SPORTS (Revised: December 3, 2020) http://a.espncdn.com/sec/media/2020/SEC%20 Task%20F... |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
12-12-20 08:32 PM - Post#317986
From Friday's New York Times College Sports Has Reported at Least 6,629 Virus Cases. There Are Many More. - The N.C.A.A. does not track coronavirus cases, but a New York Times analysis shows the pandemic’s toll across college athletics. Many universities have kept their case counts from the public. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/11/sports/cor onavi... |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
12-12-20 08:59 PM - Post#317987
If it is in fact the case that many of Florida's players tested positive over the summer, you have to wonder if that schedule can simply continue as is. Everyone will be combing over every test taken since the summer for any clues that might have either been missed, ignored, dismissed or covered up. The SEC guidelines seem pretty clear and detailed. Whether Florida actually adhered to them is another issue, although this document says that ultimately each school gets to decide how to treat each player. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
12-12-20 09:45 PM - Post#317989
28 DI games cancelled or postponed today. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
12-12-20 09:49 PM - Post#317991
Would Keyonte George, a player who reportedly tested positive (not suspected) in the summer, fit into this section of the guidelines? - Student-athletes who have a suspected past infection with positive antibody test but negative PCR test,should also undergo a medical evaluation and cardiac testing including EKG, troponinand echocardiogram. Further cardiac evaluation may be indicated based on results of medical evaluation, cardiac testing, or clinical course of past illness at the discretion of the team physician. A period of re-acclimation may not be indicated if the student-athlete has not had any interruption in training but monitoring for any signs or symptoms of cardiac complications from a suspected prior infection is advised. - |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
12-12-20 10:05 PM - Post#317993
https://www.highereddive.com/news/college-football ... - Professional players assuming certain risks are paid big salaries and have representation to negotiate protections, Edelman (a sports law professor at Baruch College) said. Students do not. But Edelman doesn't believe they'll raise objections immediately, saying COVID-19-related lawsuits from student players will likely emerge later. He predicts student-athletes who experience long-term symptoms will sue when they learn that their athletic prowess and prospects are affected. Edelman likened this to legal challenges brought against the NCAA by former college players who experienced medical problems resulting from concussions. The NCAA settled some of these claims to the tune of $75 million last year. A student death, however, would be a "nightmare scenario" for colleges and their attorneys, especially if it was due to institutional negligence, Edelman said. College students have died from COVID-19-related complications, including a football player. Even some NCAA defenders have little positive to say about its decision to let basketball proceed. Walter Harrison is president emeritus of the University of Hartford, in Connecticut, and a former chair of the NCAA's top governing board. He told Higher Ed Dive he wishes the association had pursued more stringent rules for playing, as opposed to merely guidelines. But he's also concerned the NCAA couldn't weather the brewing financial storm. When Harrison helped oversee the organization's finances in the early 2000s, the group had enough money reserved to cushion the blow of the cancellation of a single basketball season, he said. If the NCAA made massive layoffs and other cutbacks, it maybe could survive two season cuts, Harrison said. But he's not sure. "It's pretty bleak," he said. - |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
12-12-20 11:30 PM - Post#317994
That document also says that PCRs should be the tests used to determine if someone is positive. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
12-13-20 12:36 AM - Post#317995
It's not just the students, it's the impact/spread in the community. Not to blame the crazy rise in cases on just colleges, but it has to be part of the picture. This article, for example: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/12/us/covid-c olleg... |
|
1LotteryPick1969 Postdoc Posts 2275 
|
12-13-20 05:03 PM - Post#318003
The policy posted recommends three tests: EKG, troponin, and echocardiogram prior to returning to play. The EKG is a crude screen. Insensitive and not always very specific. The troponin is often elevated in the acute phase of illness, but does not always indicate direct cardiac involvement. The explanation of this is complex. I have not seen any data about the rate of return of troponin to normal. The echocardiogram is good only if the heart has been weakened. It will not detect inflammation. The MRI is the best test for any degree of myocarditis, but may be overly sensitive. I.e., some MRI's are conclusive but many are ambiguous. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
12-22-20 09:42 AM - Post#318171
A fairly high percentage of games have been played over the past three days. Perhaps, teams are getting a better handle on reducing exposure to COVID or it is just a three day exception. In any event, it appears that NCAAM is moving forward without the IL. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
12-22-20 04:33 PM - Post#318181
The whole country is moving forward without the IL. Every other school has figured out how to have sports. Even D3 schools are coming back to play basketball and other sports. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
12-22-20 05:28 PM - Post#318184
The whole country is moving forward without the IL. Every other school has figured out how to have sports. Even D3 schools are coming back to play basketball and other sports. You mean they don't care about the consequences. We now have 115,000 Americans with COVID hospitalization (we were at 30,000 around October 1st). We're now averaging over 2,600 COVID deaths per day per week (we were at 700 on October 1st). If we simply stopped spreading it around so damn much, these figures would at least start to stabilize, if not decrease. |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
12-22-20 06:26 PM - Post#318187
They have Bryce, Seth, Patrick Tape, Mike Smith, Bruner, Barry and assorted others. No one will think about the IL until they are looking for a dark horse first round upset in the NCAA office pool. As much as "Trexit" (Trump's exit) turns my stomach, it's providing an inferior replament for winter sports and the daily COVID numbers have become my relevant statistics. |
|
Old Bear Postdoc Posts 3998 |
12-22-20 08:06 PM - Post#318191
I am with HGD here, I don’t believe that NCAA basketball has many weeks ahead. I believe it was the great Andrea Bocelli (I believe he played point guard for Dartmouth) “ It’s time to say goodbyeâ€. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
12-23-20 10:34 AM - Post#318199
It is reasonable that different people can draw different conclusions as to what is best for their schools. I do not buy into the notion that all other schools and conferences have a total disregard for the health of their students other than the IL or that the IL is way off base as to what they decided. Obviously, the IL selected a different track than all other conferences. Whether they made the best decision or not will be somewhat verified by what happens across the country over the next several months. For me, I was somewhat perplexed that the IL did not even give it a try. It may turn out that the IL made the right decision. Time will tell and reality will be reality. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
12-23-20 10:51 AM - Post#318200
Myocarditis it is. https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/se c/20... |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
12-23-20 11:45 AM - Post#318201
We'll have to see how the UF, SEC and other coaches respond. 12/17/20 https://www.courier-journal.com/story/sports/colle... - Florida has not confirmed whether Johnson tested positive for COVID-19 when the team had to pause team activities in November because of positive tests, but the Associated Press reported Johnson was one of several Florida players to test positive for the virus during the summer. "I would hope if there is something related to COVID, they’d let us all know because I have a couple kids that had it earlier," Calipari said. "...If it has something to do with COVID, I would say every coach in the country would like to know if it did." - |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
12-23-20 04:47 PM - Post#318214
Yea I am not a big fan of the "IL is right" argument. Never have been. They are as or more reactionary than anyone else when it comes to Covid and sports. Their decision making is much more about where sports sit as a priority than it is about being right or doing the right thing. If NCAA basketball is stopped (it won't be) that won't mean IL was right. To throw a blanket over EVERY other school and say they are wreckless is lazy. Hundreds of schools have been very thoughtful about how to function through the pandemic and give students a chance to continue their education and their passion via sports. The IL didn't even try. IF they had tried and then closed it down first I'd think differently. THat's not what happened here. Covid death rates are increasing and the virus is bad, but it's not because of well thought out universities plans. If the whole country took the time that some of these non IL schools have taken to carefully consider protocols and safety measures, we wouldn't be where we are. The IL has not led on Covid when it comes to college sports. They haven't even followed. They just stopped moving. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
12-23-20 05:17 PM - Post#318220
One other observation is that anyone can pick one incident or one medical condition related to COVID and then draw a conclusion that the world should STOP without thinking thru alternatives. There is no guarantee as to what will happen relating to COVID if everything and anything is shutdown but certainly great care and thought should be given to how athletic programs and institutions are being run. Schools certainly realize that there are legal and reputation implications as to continuing to run athletic programs. I have watched numerous coach interviews in several sports including BB and these coaches live in a world of paranoia but great care. The vast majority of them are clearly motivated to keep playing but do it safely. No one is suggested one ounce of recklessness on the coaching front. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
12-23-20 05:25 PM - Post#318221
No one is suggested one ounce of recklessness on the coaching front. What do you call this:
You mean they don't care about the consequences. To suggest that everyone in our country trying to play basketball (except the Ivy League) is careless about consequences is just wrong and not representative of the facts on how these decisions were made (or simply not attempted in the case of the IL) |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
12-23-20 06:25 PM - Post#318226
Besides the grammatical error, I meant that coaches have been by and far very careful regarding their comments as to dealing with COVID. They almost uniformly state that they follow the directions of their university's medical staff verbatim. I am sure that a coach or two says something stupid but by and large, they are carefully listening to doctors and taking direction from those individuals with expertise. I doubt that doctors are telling them to play if the team is experiencing any health issues as they are probably very conservative. |
|
OldBig5 Masters Student Posts 639 |
12-23-20 07:57 PM - Post#318232
I would have liked to see Ivy basketball. But to act like other leagues and schools are moving forward with no issues is just silly. There have been tons of delays and cancellations. Temple just played it's first game Saturday. This will be an issue all season just as it was with NCAAF. Decision was made so time to move on. 2021-22 will be better. |
|
OldBig5 Masters Student Posts 639 |
12-23-20 08:00 PM - Post#318233
No one is suggested one ounce of recklessness on the coaching front. What do you call this:
You mean they don't care about the consequences. To suggest that everyone in our country trying to play basketball (except the Ivy League) is careless about consequences is just wrong and not representative of the facts on how these decisions were made (or simply not attempted in the case of the IL) At most of the major schools a majority of the players have probably already had COVID. I would like to think that has not been the case with Ivy league players. So to me the Ivies are helping to slow the spread while other colleges and universities are contributing to the spread. It will be interesting to see what the problem was with the Florida player who collapsed and was hospitalized. No word yet on the issue. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
12-23-20 08:02 PM - Post#318235
It will be interesting to see what the problem was with the Florida player who collapsed and was hospitalized. No word yet on the issue. It had previously been reported that he was one of several players who had COVID over the summer. Today, the news broke about his myocarditis diagnosis per my earlier post in this thread. |
|
OldBig5 Masters Student Posts 639 |
12-23-20 08:03 PM - Post#318236
I'm sorry-- I missed the article and your post before my post. I think the risk to one college kid outweighs the benefits. They are not pros. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
12-23-20 08:08 PM - Post#318237
So you somehow know that IL players haven't had Covid yet and all the other schools basketball players have had it? Hmmmmm. If you believe that I have an election fraud for you to investigate. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
12-23-20 08:34 PM - Post#318238
Well, the Rockets and Thunder are postponed tonight. I think the NBA is going to discover that trying to navigate a season without a bubble is going to be a far riskier proposition. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
12-23-20 08:49 PM - Post#318239
It certainly will a problem if people behave like James Harden going to a strip club without a mask. Hopefully, college BB players have a little more common sense but then again, Harden wants to get traded so he probably selflessly does not care. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
12-23-20 09:31 PM - Post#318241
Well, Clemson, Alabama and Notre Dame played 11 football games and the NFL has cancelled exactly zero games all season so what’s your point? You seem to love to highlight the one offs. How many college basketball games have been played vs cancelled? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
12-23-20 09:43 PM - Post#318243
OKC-Houston NBA opener cancelled tonight |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
12-23-20 10:06 PM - Post#318248
You're late to the party. See my earlier post. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
12-24-20 12:46 PM - Post#318256
Harvard's Sr. Isaiah Wingfield, all Ivy DB, announced his transfer to Wake Forest and he will be able to play 2 seasons. 247 captured his thoughts as to what it has been like to be an IL student athlete over the past year. He understands why the IL decision was made although he found it difficult emotionally when he watched other schools playing as well as even watching kids playing football. Sounds like he carefully thought through his decision and hopes to get a MBA at a very good WF Business School. WF Coach Clawson is thrilled to get him. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
12-25-20 06:19 PM - Post#318263
Report: Duke Blue Devils end women's basketball season amid coronavirus concerns https://www.espn.com/womens-college-basket ball/sto... - The Duke women's basketball team has ended its season amid the coronavirus pandemic, a person familiar with the situation told The Associated Press. The men's team planned to keep playing. - - The Blue Devils are the first Power 5 school to have started this season and will not finish it because of the virus. The Ivy League opted out of playing winter sports in November before the basketball season started. A few other schools also decided not to play this year. New coach Kara Lawson, who was hired in July, had said this month: "I don't think we should be playing right now. That's my opinion on it." That came a day after Duke men's coach Mike Krzyzewski questioned why college basketball was being played in the midst of the pandemic. - |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
12-29-20 09:34 PM - Post#318317
SMU Mustangs opt out of the remainder of women's basketball season https://www.espn.com/womens-college-basket ball/sto... - The SMU women's basketball team has decided not to play the remainder of its 2020-21 season, with players opting out because of health and safety concerns surrounding COVID-19. The school said in a statement that while the players agreed all possible steps and precautions had been taken to keep them healthy and safe, they decided "that the totality of the circumstances was resulting in an in-season experience that they did not wish to prolong.'' Athletic director Rick Hart said it was a difficult decision for the players to make and that the school supported them. - |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
12-29-20 09:37 PM - Post#318318
Sports Illustrated It Took a Pandemic to See the Distorted State of College Sports https://www.si.com/college/2020/12/29/gl obal-pande... - The Ivy League was the first conference to cancel its men’s and women’s basketball tournaments, in March, and it has consistently canceled and postponed events ever since. In November, the conference axed its winter-sports season and vowed not to stage any events until at least the end of February. These decisions have been portrayed as proof that the Ivy League is taking the pandemic seriously, or confirmation that sports aren’t important to the Ivies. The thinking behind the decision, though, was simpler and far more revealing. In the Ivy League, sports—from football to fencing—are student activities, subject to the same rules and regulations as any other student activity. Traveling from campus to campus to play sports was incompatible with COVID-19 restrictions. “While the decision was clear, it’s still painful,†says Ivy League executive director Robin Harris. “We spent countless hours working with our athletic directors and coaches since March—looking at schedules, looking at protocols, looking at ways we can conduct athletic competition. That included looking at different mitigation strategies for travel. We spent an inordinate amount of time [and presented] presidents with concepts and frameworks. They just felt like that would be inconsistent with campus policies. It was not a difficult decision.†- |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
12-29-20 09:56 PM - Post#318320
It's what I thought all along---it's the bogus "fairness" argument. We have a fiction that we treat athletes just like all other students so we can't do what is necessary during a pandemic (a bubble) to allow them to play a season. It easily could have been done, and it will hurt our league for a number of years, if not longer. We were on a track to competing for Power Conference players. They know we're not serious about sports now. |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
12-29-20 11:51 PM - Post#318322
The fact that things are not 100% fair doesn’t mean that we should abandon fairness altogether. As I’ve already suggested, efforts to plan as safe a season as possible (e.g., a bubble) were doomed. Not a priority under these circumstances. This neither concerns or disappoints me. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
12-30-20 01:06 AM - Post#318324
It's a cop out. The easy path. It does not demonstrate concern, only convenience. I agree the harm will likely be long lasting on our league. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
12-30-20 06:11 AM - Post#318326
We Ivies live with a fiction---that our "student-athletes" are treated no differently from the rest of the student body. Thus we have an "AI" (of course, not part of the original Ivy agreement, but imposed to create 'fairness') to provide an objective admissions floor, but non-athletes have no such floor. We prohibit athletic scholarships but have such generous financial aid (some much better than others--so much for 'fairness') that recruitment can be tailored to provide de facto scholarships for the best players. We provide the athletes with individualized academic help and a built in network of job opportunities that the non-athlete simply does not have handed to him/her. So the explanation that we cannot have a basketball season because we must treat student athletes like all other students doesn't wash. But for me, the key is that in a bubble, we could have treated them as we do all others, who similarly must take their classes virtually. We could have sent all the men's and women's basketball and hockey teams to Cornell, housed them in dorms (no students were there) and over a 6 week period, played a full round robin while they were taking classes (although most of the time would have been intersession). And the argument that sending them to a distant location during intersession would be treating them differently from all other students is weak, since athletes in winter sports regularly compete during intersession while others are on vacation. The explanations all fall short. We could have shown all the other conferences how to compete safely. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
12-30-20 09:52 AM - Post#318327
Reality Check: Over the past 4 days, 80% of NCAAM and 70% of NCAAW games have been played even after the spike in COVID numbers. Some have argued since the beginning of the season that the season would be shutdown "shortly" and it still might be. Games are being played in collegiate and professional sports with bumps along the way. Shutdown advocates advocate theoretical responses as to what the IL is the only conference in the US that it has it correct. Advocates for starting to play support strict protocols and shut it down if facts dictate such a response. Aiken, Towns, and others play while their former teammates do not -- logical??? I hope that Knight and Schwiegger enjoy Loyola next year. When it comes to sports, IL administration has a track record especially relating to BB. Time will tell as to who had it right or wrong or somewhere in between. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
12-30-20 11:02 AM - Post#318328
P38: there is no "argument" against the bubble. It simply was never considered. Bradley: "Time" will not tell who was right or wrong. A broken clock is right 2x a day. The Ivy league didn't lead here and any narrative that they had it "right" even if everyone shuts down later (they won't) is coincidental, not discerning. They didn't care to compete in athletics because it was the easiest and most convenient decision, not because all the smart scientists , administrators and coaches got in a room and figured out it wasn't safe. If that had happened, then kudos may be in order. That didn't happen here and every other conference did the work the IL didn't care to do. Sad times for the athletes. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
12-30-20 11:20 AM - Post#318329
I agree that the decision was incorrect not to even try but if the BB season is ultimately cancelled, the argument will be that the advocates to cancel the season were simply ahead of the curve. In fairness, the cancellation of the IL Tournament in March was ahead of the curve although everyone cancelled within a week of the IL decision. It kind of reminds me what is going on in certain parts of the country as to the lockdown approach vs. a different approach but it is what it is. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
12-30-20 11:25 AM - Post#318330
While I don't really know what "right" means here (it would seem to be relative depending on who is making the decision), a lot of the arguments presented above are either entirely wrong or somewhat misleading. What we know is that March Madness has to happen this year from a monetary perspective. What we also know is that prominent coaches like Coach K, Pitino, Capel have said they don't think they should be playing. And finally what almost everyone on these boards agrees on is that traveling around the Northeast right now is a non-starter (folks here and there might disagree, but seems like the overwhelming majority understands the risks there are not within an acceptable range for this league). So, what that leaves is the bubble. I don't know to what level a bubble was discussed, if seriously at all, at the league office. Regardless of process, I'm not at all surprised by the outcome of dismissing it. It would either need to be a semi-permeable bubble that would leave lots of potential risks or a completely closed bubble that would be a logistical nightmare and practical impossibility. It's common practice to blame the presidents, and frankly, it's quite fun. But the blame being thrown around here is wildly off base, sadly. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
12-30-20 12:28 PM - Post#318331
For those interested, here are several posts I placed with quotes from Robin Harris about the thought process behind the league's decision.
11-12-20 08:38 PM - Post#316635 https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/ _/id/303... - "We are heartbroken to be here again," Harris said. "It's based on the current trends of the virus and rates and the impact that has on our campus policies that are going to continue to restrict travel, group gathering sizes, visitors to campus. Athletics is important to all of our schools, to our presidents. All aspects of campuses are being asked to make sacrifices and change the way they operate, and unfortunately that has extended into athletics as well." Harris said the league's coaches and athletic directors came up with alternative options on how to conduct a season, including eliminating overnight stays and changing the way they handle meals on the road. While those options would have mitigated the risk to a degree, it wasn't enough. A bubble for the conference was never a legitimate consideration, Harris said. - - While the Ivy League was the first domino to fall in March, it is unlikely that every conference in the country will follow the league's decision this time around. "This decision is about what's right and responsible for the Ivy League based on current trends and our campus policies, and our presidents prioritizing health and safety of student-athletes, coaches and the greater campus communities," Harris said. "Others are going to have to make the best decisions for their schools and conferences. It's hard to predict the future. The trends are not good." Harris said the Ivy League has not had discussions with the NCAA on whether it will still receive an NCAA tournament share or any money from the NCAA tournament. The league has not changed its policies on allowing graduate students to play sports, despite the NCAA granting every winter athlete a free year this season. -
11-30-20 01:33 PM - Post#317487 The Executive Director did not mention fairness when interviewed by ESPN after the announcement. She was not asked about having a short season bubble between the fall & spring semesters and did not offer that information on her own.
11-15-20 02:26 PM - Post#316749 Freddie Coleman of ESPN interviewed Robin Harris (9 minutes long) about the cancelled season. https://cms.megaphone.fm/channel/ESP1407137613? sel... When asked about a bubble (4 minutes mark), Harris said that a season long bubble was not feasible since the student athletes live and interact with other students. She did not expand on that answer or mention anything regarding cost, logistics or fairness with the other winter sports. After her short bubble answer, she said they talked about travel for a team to go to another Ivy school on a charter bus creating a 'modified travel bubble'. With schools restricting travel for everyone, it was also determined not to be feasible.
12-29-20 08:37 PM - Post#318318
Sports Illustrated It Took a Pandemic to See the Distorted State of College Sports https://www.si.com/college/2020/12/29/gl obal-pande... - The Ivy League was the first conference to cancel its men’s and women’s basketball tournaments, in March, and it has consistently canceled and postponed events ever since. In November, the conference axed its winter-sports season and vowed not to stage any events until at least the end of February. These decisions have been portrayed as proof that the Ivy League is taking the pandemic seriously, or confirmation that sports aren’t important to the Ivies. The thinking behind the decision, though, was simpler and far more revealing. In the Ivy League, sports—from football to fencing—are student activities, subject to the same rules and regulations as any other student activity. Traveling from campus to campus to play sports was incompatible with COVID-19 restrictions. “While the decision was clear, it’s still painful,†says Ivy League executive director Robin Harris. “We spent countless hours working with our athletic directors and coaches since March—looking at schedules, looking at protocols, looking at ways we can conduct athletic competition. That included looking at different mitigation strategies for travel. We spent an inordinate amount of time [and presented] presidents with concepts and frameworks. They just felt like that would be inconsistent with campus policies. It was not a difficult decision.†- |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
12-30-20 12:59 PM - Post#318332
It is always interesting how some people are way off base if they have a different opinion than someone else. There are legitimately different points of view on this topic. Reality is that teams are playing BB in the Northeast, California and other hot spots across the country and games are being played. Reality is that some coaches disagree that games should be played while there are plenty of others who have a different point of view. IL administrators have taken a contrarian view than all other conferences in the country and that is their right. I believe that point made by several people is that the IL could have taken a different approach and give it the "old college try". |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
12-30-20 01:18 PM - Post#318333
a lot of the arguments presented above are either entirely wrong or somewhat misleading. But the blame being thrown around here is wildly off base, sadly. Since you were responding to my post, I'd like to know what, if anything, I have said that is "entirely wrong" "somewhat misleading" or "wildly off base"? I stand by my comments. Bradley, well put. There is some kind of massive disconnect that most of the colleges in the country are figuring out how to keep doing life while protecting their students, staff, etc and what the Ivy League has decided. Hundreds of non power 5 schools including D3 that are figuring out how to do sports and college life amidst a brutal pandemic. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
12-30-20 01:33 PM - Post#318334
Even with the incredibly positive news of multiple successful vaccines being distributed, there is still a huge amount of bad news. Infections, hospitalizations, and ICU use remain dangerously high. Despite being told to stay home, US travel was over 1 million per day around the holidays. Vaccine rollout is slower than expected. A new variant, which is more transmissible (if not more lethal), is in the US. Since experts were warning about the increasing winter numbers and their effects on the healthcare system months ago, it is understandable that the IL presidents made the decision to cancel the season. For those on this message board (including me) that felt that a complete or semi-permeable short-season bubble was the most (or only) legitimate option to consider, I just wish that the Executive Director had a more detailed response why the league & presidents did not give it serious consideration and why they felt it was not a feasible option. Looking at where things stand at the end of December, the sports world may again be moving in direction of the IL presidents. The difference is that these actions are coming from the players and coaches worried about the safety of teams, staff & communities, instead of their administrators. Everton vs Manchester City Premier League match postponed on 12/28. Tottenham vs Fulham match postponed on 12/30 (prior to these games only 1 other Premier League match had been postponed). New West Bromwich Albion manager Sam Allardyce is the first to publicly call for a pause in the season due to the increase in cases and the new variant in the UK. https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/30/football/p remier-le... SMU women's basketball shuts down for season on 12/29. Duke women's basketball shuts down for season on 12/25. According to information in the Raleigh News & Observer, the Duke players, who were being tested every day, decided to end the season after their request that their opponents be tested daily was not granted by the ACC (which tests three times per week). https://www.espn.com/womens-college-basket ball/sto... Chicago State men's basketball decides to end season on 12/23 Coach K questions why college basketball is playing during the pandemic on 12/8. The Duke men's team cancels the rest of its non-conference schedule on 12/10. Pitt's Jeff Capel also questions playing while in a pandemic on 12/7. He ends up testing positive for covid a week ago - while not being hospitalized, Capel says he had a rough experience. https://www.post-gazette.com/sports/Pitt/2020/12/2 ... (Perhaps if/when more information is provided by the University of Florida and/or Keyontae Johnson about his reported acute myocarditis and the clearance protocol given to him by the UF athletic department, more players or teams will reconsider their earlier decisions.) |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
12-30-20 01:54 PM - Post#318335
You are rightly identifying exceptions that would support the IL Presidents decision but there is the opposite view based on 80% of games actually being played over the past several days when some people stated that BB would be shutdown 30 days ago. At the end of the day, reality is reality. Theory is theory and opinions are opinions. Time will tell. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
12-30-20 02:53 PM - Post#318338
This is about college football, not basketball, but is a sober read all the same. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/30/magazine/c olleg... |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
12-30-20 02:57 PM - Post#318339
In the mean time 2020 data shows that out of 1.2B airline passengers and over 16M flights, a total of 44 people contracted Covid from flying. 44 out of 1.2B! Every NFL game has been played. NBA basketball is in full swing. D3 (non revenue) is starting to play basketball in January, etc, etc, etc. But we can't figure out how to play sports at Ivy League schools because it's not safe? Something doesn't jive. This quote: “We spent countless hours working with our athletic directors and coaches since March—looking at schedules, looking at protocols, looking at ways we can conduct athletic competition. That included looking at different mitigation strategies for travel. We spent an inordinate amount of time [and presented] presidents with concepts and frameworks. They just felt like that would be inconsistent with campus policies. It was not a difficult decision.†Says it all to me. The AD's, coaches and staff looked at every avenue and presented them to the Presidents and they said "...that would be inconsistent with campus policies. It was not a difficult decision" That's not considering anything. That's dismissive of the work those AD's and coaches did to create a safe solution. It ignores the science. Look this is a deadly disease to about 1% of the population and we all have to take great care to protect the most vulnerable, but this is a solvable problem they chose not to solve. Basketball, football,etc is not shutting down. It didn't shut down in November or December (except for us) and it wont' shut down again. We know so much more now than we did in March. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
12-30-20 03:23 PM - Post#318340
The NYT article from earlier this afternoon, Was the College Football Season Worth It?, is a long form article that focuses on the Big Ten, the Ohio State AD & newly installed President (former SUNY Chancellor) and Big 10 Commissioner (former Penn MBB player Kevin Warren). Given its length, it will probably be in this weekend's NYT Magazine section. It is a very good article. Since most of the people interviewed were on the side that favored finding a way to play Big 10 football, it would have been a better article if he had interviewed people who didn't want to play or any people (student, athlete, family) that had a change of heart after the season began. Spoiler alert - Pros for playing: TV and playoff money for athletic departments that had major losses and cut programs due to covid. Supporting players and their families that wanted the games to be played Providing an outlet to improve the emotional health of students and communities that support the schools/teams Cons for playing: Increased infections to players and staff despite strong protocols Potentially jeopardizing the long term health of players and staff Increased infections to students and people in the community (in states that already had high numbers) who gathered in sizable groups to watch the games on TV |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
12-30-20 04:27 PM - Post#318342
The author of the article was less than sanguine in assessing whether it was all "worth it". |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
12-30-20 04:37 PM - Post#318343
First, let’s start with this notion that the Ivy League didn’t try. It tried. It had its teams engaging in athletic activities, and the issue was that they couldn’t consistently stick in higher phases and kept getting bumped back down to phase zero. As far as I understand it, it was that inability to maintain in-person activities for any extended period of time without having an outbreak that was the final straw that broke the back of moving forward with a 20-21 season. Second - let’s address this “everyone’s moving forward with their seasons†argument. It’s misleading. Yes. College football teams have made it to the finish line, but many that could opted out of bowl games, others had too many positive tests to move forward with bowl games and at certain points in the season roughly a third of football games were being cancelled per week. College basketball has had a similarly rough and bizarre start not including what we might ultimately find out about Keyontae. Yes, these seasons have moved forward, but not without a ton of cancelled games and positive student athletes, something that the Ivies wouldn’t have powered through - so the season wouldn’t have lasted long even if the league “gave it the old college try,†as has been asked. Finally, we’ll see what happens with non-Power 5 basketball and how that ultimately unfolds, but the Power 5 conference teams are merely playing to be good partners to get their full TV contracts. It’s why ACC teams opted out of the bowls - their job fulfilling the media contract was done at the end of the regular season. The student athletes on those teams voted not to play in the bowl games because they were just worn out from such a crazy season. I’m not objecting to the notion that there can be differing opinions on the issue of whether to play or not. I’m objecting to the notion that the presidents wouldn’t have played or even considered playing no matter what. If Ivy teams had been able to stay in higher phases consistently, cases nationally stayed really low and we didn’t have a third of football games wiped out weekly, things might have turned out differently. All of those worked massively against us right when this decision had to be made. There’s no denying that the assumption the presidents were deadset against playing this year was a reasonable conclusion to draw based on the past behavior of that group, but it’s misplaced in this case. |
|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
12-30-20 05:33 PM - Post#318345
I think the “powering through†point is a good one. Two keys for college football and basketball (and MLB and the NFL) are a plan for what to do when positive tests occur and flexibility. Fundamental to both of those keys is a certain amount of comfort with players testing positive. Even if a bubble were feasible, I suspect there would still be positive tests at some point. I am not sure the Ivy presidents were willing to roll with that, and I think that is a perfectly reasonable decision. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
12-30-20 06:17 PM - Post#318348
Powering thru is exactly what every teams whether collegiate or professional have been doing. Powering thru can be a wonderful learning experience as adversity is what all of us face at sometime during our lives. A young man that we know has experienced the challenge of playing football this year but he is so pleased that he hung in there and finished their season and career today. He also had the thrill of experiencing Senior Day albeit an unusual one. I am sure that many IL players would love to be on the court right now. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
12-30-20 07:49 PM - Post#318350
For an interesting view of what it was like to be an athlete and coach during COVID, the postgame interview captured by YouTube of 3 Wake Forest football players and Coach Clawson after their loss to Wisconsin today says a whole lot. The interviews provide some good perspective as to the pros and cons of playing through the adversity of COVID. 3 RS Seniors are coming back to play next year for some unfinished business. It might provide some good perspective as to what young men learn in dealing with adversity. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
12-30-20 08:11 PM - Post#318351
I don't think we are fans of a league that would refer to playing through a pandemic as simply "adversity." Detroit Mercy just announced that they're taking a mental health break. No positive tests, just dealing with this season has been hard on the players. Is that just "adversity" they should be playing through? I get that everyone wanted to see Ivy hoops this year, and that it's angering to see other sports and leagues moving forward while the Ivy doesn't. To some extent that feeling is common in this pandemic (why do I have to follow the rules and not go to the gym, when I see all these people at my gym on Instagram all the time?). But the result of that feeling shouldn't be to make self-serving claims like "maybe some adversity would be good for them," when what you're really saying is "if they or their teammates get COVID they'll be fine and it'll teach them a lesson how to overcome obstacles." This is a pandemic. Let's get some perspective. Stop blaming the presidents for making an entirely reasonable decision. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
12-30-20 09:36 PM - Post#318352
But the result of that feeling shouldn't be to make self-serving claims like "maybe some adversity would be good for them," when what you're really saying is "if they or their teammates get COVID they'll be fine and it'll teach them a lesson how to overcome obstacles." This is a pandemic. Let's get some perspective. Indeed. Especially when the disparities in receiving proper care, medicines, hospitalization, etc. are mirroring the larger disparities in this country. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
12-30-20 11:12 PM - Post#318354
NY Times Editorial Board looks at the problems of the college football season and calls on college administrators & the NCAA to delay the basketball season for the health & welfare of the players and their communities. Don't Let The Games Begin https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/30/opinion/co llege... |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
12-31-20 01:42 PM - Post#318363
Your numbers are quite exaggerated MrJ. There were a couple of weeks where as many as a third of the games were cancelled (that's the high end of a couple of weeks) and there were many more weeks where a majority of the games got played. Do you know the percentage of games played vs cancelled? Do you know the number of positive tests vs negative tests in college sports? I know it's extremely low for many teams. For a self proclaimed empiricist you seem to want to highlight the exceptions and one off's quite a bit. Also, there are literally HUNDREDS of non power 5 schools playing sports and operating with careful considerations to the athletes. So this is NOT a pandemic exclusive to those beholden to TV contracts. The college presidents did not really try in my opinion. At least not with any thought they might continue. Certainly not the way most have tried. This quote from Robin Harris is telling: "They [the college presidents] just felt like that would be inconsistent with campus policies. It was not a difficult decision." That's a very dismissive quote and supports what I believe happened. The IL Presidents don't have a crystal ball into the future that hundreds of other college presidents (mostly non power 5) don't have. They took the easy path out and didn't really care. Nothing you have said has changed my opinion of that. |
|
sparman PhD Student Posts 1347 
|
12-31-20 03:26 PM - Post#318367
In the mean time 2020 data shows that out of 1.2B airline passengers and over 16M flights, a total of 44 people contracted Covid from flying. 44 out of 1.2B! This supposed stat has as much credence as the claim that there were millions of fraudulent votes. It's a stat put out by IALTA, the trade association of airlines. The same airlines that promised strict covid rules for spacing of passengers at the same time they were actually packing them in. I know of several people who believe they contracted it from air travel. Minutes ago I was told by an acquaintance that one of their employees became sick after likely getting it from visiting grandparents who flew over the holiday. There is a documented incident of 59 people on a single flight (in Ireland) getting it: https://www.dw.com/en/how-safe-is-air-tr avel-durin... Here is a more detailed assessment: https://www.vox.com/21525068/covid-19-air plane-ris... And: "Flying involves not only sitting on an airplane, but spending time in transit to and from the airport; queuing for check-in, emigration and security at the departure airport; and queuing for possible health checks, immigration, luggage collection and customs at the arrival airport, possibly in another country." I am not saying the IL should shut down forever. They need to monitor developments and adjust as necessary. While I prefer the institutions be safer rather than sorry when it comes to lives of others, and others may have a different risk tolerance than I do, garbage stats do not help that process. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
12-31-20 03:42 PM - Post#318368
Be prepared for character assassination if you have a different point of view as there is only one answer for some -- 'the right one". Examples are used as confirmation to support one's point of view rather than being what they are - examples. At the end of the day, the percentage of games played takes out quite a bit of the theoretical arguments or so called fact arguments that can be made by both sides on the issue. The IL Presidents may be right or maybe not -- time will tell. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
12-31-20 03:47 PM - Post#318369
Well, to be clear, I primarily post here for the benefit of folks that read a lot more than they post to ensure that they have the best info I can provide. I'm not really focused on changing your mind, which seems pretty made up. In college football, it really was a tale of two seasons. In Sept and Oct, when cases were relatively low nationally and spikes were isolated to particular regions of the country, very few games were cancelled each week. It did look like the worst fears were overblown. This also coincided with the timeframe when it looked like winter and spring sports would happen for the Ivy League. Week 10 (the start of November) is when things turned HARD - it was the first week that double-digit games had to be postponed or cancelled, and there would be double-digit postponements or cancellations every week thereafter. It's hard to explicitly pinpoint a percentage of games scheduled, because in the later weeks and for bowl games, conferences just stopped rescheduling games that teams didn't want to play and bowls were cancelled that teams didn't want to attend. There were more than 40 bowls scheduled for 2020, and it looks like 26 will end up getting played. So, yes, if you look at the season as a whole, 1/3rd is high. If you look at the part of the season that occurred while the country was spiking, it's a pretty good estimate. While there are many non-Power 5 schools playing winter sports, I-AA, II and III cancelled football and the other fall championships. The I-AA teams that did play a minimal number of games did so to get the big $$$ they could to play the non-conf games that still existed against I-A competition. We'll see how things go in winter competition, but it's hardly clear to this point that the lower divisions will be successful in completing a season. What I can say is this... there were legitimate beliefs, up until the final week or so prior to the decision, that the league would go forward with basically five or six teams and leave Harvard and Yale (and maybe Princeton) in the dust. That would have been a pretty radical move for the league, and I firmly believe that it wasn't just all blowing smoke (it would have been a crazy thing to suggest if it wasn't legitimately being discussed). Folks around the league have a pretty sober view of what the presidents will and won't allow, but there were legitimately differing views on this point. There wouldn't have been if this were something preordained from day one. So, again, I'd suggest folks save their "anti-president" rants for the unnecessarily dumb, self-defeating stuff they actually do, rather than their decisions surrounding a pandemic. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
12-31-20 07:45 PM - Post#318378
Now please tell us why a bubble at Cornell was never a serious consideration and I'll never mention it again. I agree (and always have) that playing a regular season with travel was insane. But we could have done a bubble for basketball and hockey (men's and women's) and it would have worked. And we would have shown everyone how it's done |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
12-31-20 08:20 PM - Post#318382
Your article restates the stat that 44 out of 1.2B is accurate. I understand the risk is higher than that due to lines at security and gates, etc. But the reality is air travel occurrences are extremely low by all credible statistics. The presidents made a safe decision. There is nothing wrong with it and It was predictable. But defending them is a joke. Your can’t defend being the only D1 conference in the country that didn’t even try to play basketball. There were ways to do it and they didn’t want to so they cancelled. I am actually quite sensitive to the virus as a good friend of mine, who was a basketball coach, died this week from Covid. I still believe it’s the responsibility of those in charge to do everything they can to keep people safe AND provide as many opportunities as possible to provide as normal a college life as possible. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
12-31-20 08:37 PM - Post#318383
These are not normal times. Full stop. |
|
LocalTiger Masters Student Posts 434 |
12-31-20 10:40 PM - Post#318389
"There is nothing wrong with the Presidents decision," But "defending it is a joke." Well- reasoned. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
01-01-21 11:55 PM - Post#318417
curious if mike or pf10 have any data, or know if surveys were conducted, asking what the kids and coaches preferred. Mike has blessedly avoided it, but there's a huge streak of paternalism going through posters like PN. |
|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
01-01-21 11:57 PM - Post#318418
44 just doesn’t make any sense. Of the people I know personally who have had COVID, a couple think they got it on an airplane. It seems hard to imagine that I would happen to know more than one of 44 worldwide. Do the airlines, in making that claim, know exactly where everyone who has contracted COVID got it? |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
01-02-21 07:26 PM - Post#318463
curious if mike or pf10 have any data, or know if surveys were conducted, asking what the kids and coaches preferred. Mike has blessedly avoided it, but there's a huge streak of paternalism going through posters like PN. I would expect that most would want to play. I mean, that's like doing a survey of restaurant owners asking if they want to stay open or not. But this is an issue of public health, not of "paternalism". What any individual wants to do or not do is secondary to this. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
01-02-21 09:05 PM - Post#318465
Yeah, I’m sympathetic to the “paternalism†argument for a variety of reasons (reading behavioral ec, finding some tenets of libertarianism interesting, having interactions with folks of a political persuasion, etc.). As PN says, though, in matters where one’s decisions directly impact those around them and society at large, I’m not as sure that paternalism applies - at least as a pejorative to be avoided. People have obviously taken a variety of approaches to this virus. Some have ignored it entirely, others have begrudgingly taken precautions they’ve been forced to do, while others have happily taken precautions but kept mobility up, and others have stayed away from most indoor locations except when forced to, etc. Regardless of what each person’s opinion is of those approaches, I’d hope we can all agree, as a matter of fact, that the more risk a person takes, the more likely it is that they will create a new vector that ultimately in that vector chain could lead to someone’s death. I think it is that simple fact that is driving different decision makers to make different decisions much more than it is spite about athletics or laziness. And I think we should respect those decisions rather than defaulting to conspiracy theories. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
01-02-21 11:38 PM - Post#318467
curious if mike or pf10 have any data, or know if surveys were conducted, asking what the kids and coaches preferred. Mike has blessedly avoided it, but there's a huge streak of paternalism going through posters like PN. I would expect that most would want to play. I mean, that's like doing a survey of restaurant owners asking if they want to stay open or not. But this is an issue of public health, not of "paternalism". What any individual wants to do or not do is secondary to this. This analogy misses the mark. I want a survey of the restaurant workers, not the restaurant owners (colleges who might stand to make money off the backs of others) nor restaurant patrons (us fans). I tend to think the NBA/NFL/colleges are responsible for very few cases outside that of the players/coaches and of course the baseline we should measure on for players isn't 0 as players would and did get sick during the offseason. You know, as I type this, there were some pretty ridiculous pictures of college football stadiums in the south. But I wouldn't have expected fans to be admitted to any Ivy bball game. I don't feel the public health argument is overly compelling. I take Mike's points and they are good ones. we're in the darkest month of this pandemic so I can't get too worked up about not playing but also will note that the Sixers playing every other night has served as wonderful entertainment in a brutal winter. I'd feel more selfish/worse about this if i knew the players didn't want to play. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
01-02-21 11:51 PM - Post#318468
I want a survey of the restaurant workers, not the restaurant owners (colleges who might stand to make money off the backs of others) nor restaurant patrons (us fans). You'd get the same result, if not even moreso. These folks--not the owners-- are the folks who are on the hook for getting evicted, standing in long lines at food banks, etc. In terms of the pro sports surveys, these players have a limited athletic shelf life--of course they want to play! I'm really sorry to hear that the public health "issue" "argument" doesn't seem sufficiently compelling for you, or, for that matter, many others. This dismissive attitude is certainly contributing to the predicament we continue to face today. We're all in this boat together. |
|
Bryan Junior Posts 231 |
01-03-21 12:02 AM - Post#318469
The thread title annoys me because it is incorrect. "This proves that Covid can be managed at Universities" implies that the impact on college campuses stops there. It does not. There are about 350,000 Americans who have died directly or secondarily from Covid. Every one of them was infected by someone else. There is about 1 death now for every 100 reported cases. That means that for every 100 cases on college campuses among students, where it's likely that none of those infected will die, there will still be at least one death caused by those 100 cases as the disease is passed to the next wave and the wave after that. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
01-03-21 07:13 AM - Post#318470
That is true, but it is a balancing issue. The question is what price are you willing to pay economically for a disease for which about 85-90% have no symptoms and about 1% die, the vast majority of whom are elderly or have other health risks. Clearly, what should have been done immediately was a 30 day lockdown, after telling people to stock up for 30 days, and sending everyone a check so they could pay their rent/mortgage. That was our chance to stop it in its tracks. And it had to be done at the federal level. But our political illness, one that is STILL ongoing, prevented that from happening. At this point, there is a strong argument to be made that the health risks to those who are not in one of the high risk categories, cannot justify the ongoing economic disruption. If you compare the economics of how we have handled Covid with the 1918 pandemic, we are doing far worse (leaving the stock market aside--it did well both pandemics, which tells you what Wall Street values) this time around, although Covid affects relatively few working age people. But it's pretty easy for most of us to call for drastic measure---few professionals (and that's what most of us are here) have been severely affected by this. The more than 10 million who have lost jobs and are on the brink don't post here. So Jeff's comment is a legitimate one. And the only reason to completely shut down the basketball season was that the Ivies don't care about sports. For other programs and their athletes, the sacrifices and the revenue (for the schools) and potential revenue (for the players) make the risks worthwhile (except for guys like Coach K who already has his money). I agree that the kind of travel that the Ivies do made the threat (primarily to those associated with the programs, not the players) unacceptable. But we could have done a bubble. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
01-03-21 09:55 AM - Post#318475
I have come to the conclusion that many people see the COVID issue as to a black and white issue on either side of the equation and it has translated into something greater --- politics. Therefore, it is understandable that some people would suggest that no sports should be played at all while some would advocate that fans should watch a sporting event in a stadium. There are a fair number of people who would advocate what you have suggested -- playing in a bubble at a remote location. Seems reasonable to me who is a pretty cautious elderly person who lives life in a quasi bubble. At the end of the day, no one is going to change anyone's mind with rare exceptions. The IL Presidents made a decision that is outside the norm as to decisions made by all other conferences -- simple statement of fact. Basketball games are being played with a fair number of cancellations -- simple statement of fact. I would not be surprised if IL Presidents had concerns about playing sporting events even in a bubble if they were not permitting students on campus -- optics? Fortunately, we have a vaccine around the corner which should dramatically reduce the noise level. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
01-03-21 12:03 PM - Post#318476
I have been supportive of a bubble from the beginning, at least in terms of having the ability to deal with the public health components of this issue far, far better than what is currently happening in college sports. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
01-03-21 11:00 PM - Post#318505
Defaulting to conspiracy theories? Don’t be ridiculous. Who on here did that? I would bet almost every player wants to play. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
01-04-21 01:09 PM - Post#318543
Another wild conspiracy theory just in: https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketba ll/story... |
|
Go Green PhD Student Posts 1149 |
01-04-21 03:57 PM - Post#318556
Holy Cross and Boston U going to play tomorrow night with masks. https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketba ll/story... |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
01-04-21 04:28 PM - Post#318558
And they are playing tonight at Holy Cross where according to the article the BU team will be masked but not Holy Cross. Which seems to make little sense from a public health perspective and could make the double masking the following night irrelevant. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
01-04-21 04:46 PM - Post#318561
The mask wearing is certainly an interesting idea. If this game photo is representative of how they are wearing the mask (below the nose and below the mouth), then it really isn't going to make any real difference. https://twitter.com/GoodmanHoops/status/1 346176502... |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
01-04-21 05:24 PM - Post#318562
It would also be interesting to view a game clip to see to what extent the masks stay in place (such as they are) when there is movement and/or contact. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
01-04-21 06:32 PM - Post#318567
Conspiracy theories don't have to be wild to be conspiracy theories. I have raised an issue with the notion shared on these boards that the presidents wanted no part of a season under any circumstances and were predestined to cancel it from the start. Different posters argued different flavors of that, so I apologize for bucketing them all together, but they generally followed that theme. Despite articles laying out how the Ivy approached the decision and ultimately why the presidents ruled the way they did, many posters are forwarding a conspiracy theory that the discussions to potentially have a season were never in good faith, based on a notion that the presidents are always anti-athletics and thus it is logical that they would take the most anti-athletics stance possible here. I see no way that plans would be approved for different phases of return, that teams would be allowed to practice to prepare to return and that folks around the different programs around our league would have differing opinions (both differing from each other AND opinions that changed from the same team over time) if the presidents were dead set against this and it was never going to happen. I know what it sounds like when a proposal is DOA and when it has legs. The potential to return had legs. Until many things with the virus all went south at the same time right when a decision had to be made. Then it was, indeed, a really easy decision. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
01-04-21 07:14 PM - Post#318570
Can Covid be managed? There is more than enough data to say it can only be managed if people act within bands of behavior that minimize risk. None of us have enough experience with this to know exactly where the boundaries lie, but there is a good set of examples out there now. Will having a college basketball sports season result in some longer term health issues and deaths for some population of people that might otherwise not have happened? Seems almost undeniable. https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketba ll/story... Is it worth it to accept some further covid spread to let sports and other activities (restaurant openings, etc.)? That is a decision as a society. Clearly ours doesn't agree. I have my own views, but clearly current NCAA policies haven't made it safe for everyone. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
01-04-21 09:09 PM - Post#318578
I think that you might be over reacting regarding the conspiracy theory notion. What I have read is that several people have asked a relatively simple question -- "Did the IL Presidents consider playing a conference season in a bubble"? I may have missed it but not sure if an answer has been provided to simple question but perhaps the specific question has not even been raised to Robin Harris or a league representative. Again, I may have missed if an answer has been provided. No matter what the answer to this question, some people, including myself, have raised the question if it is the correct decision as to not attempting to play conference games just like every other conference including conferences in the the Northeast and hot spots. As previously stated, people can legitimately have different opinions on the subject as there are a fair number of fans of other conferences who believe that it is a bad idea to play games. What I find a tad bit disturbing is the notion that a Coach, University President, Medical Staff of the University or fans really do not care about the health of the players or society if they are supportive to the concept of playing games. The same question could also be asked if any other activity other than food, healthcare, etc. should be shutdown. It seems somewhat close minded to not even consider the views of everyone but it is what it is. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
01-05-21 11:06 AM - Post#318612
"Time" will not tell who was right or wrong. A broken clock is right 2x a day. The Ivy league didn't lead here and any narrative that they had it "right" even if everyone shuts down later (they won't) is coincidental, not discerning. They didn't care to compete in athletics because it was the easiest and most convenient decision, not because all the smart scientists , administrators and coaches got in a room and figured out it wasn't safe. If that had happened, then kudos may be in order. That didn't happen here and every other conference did the work the IL didn't care to do. Sad times for the athletes.
|
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
01-05-21 05:38 PM - Post#318632
That's my quote and you haven't presented any evidence other than your own opinion to contradict it. How do you explain your opinion that the IL Presidents "tried to have a season" when every other D1 conference made the effort to create a safe environment for their teams to play? The IL took the path of least resistance. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
01-05-21 06:30 PM - Post#318636
The whole country is moving forward without the IL. Every other school has figured out how to have sports. Even D3 schools are coming back to play basketball and other sports. You mean they don't care about the consequences. Yeah/Sure - College Presidents, ADs', Coaches and University Medical Staffs across the country "do not care about the consequences" as they are only concerned about money. Literally, every coach that has been interviewed states that we listened to and are governed by the recommendations of the medical professionals whether to play or not. I guess the theory is that all of these MDs' have sold their soul to the devil for a dollar. Irrational and non-sensical. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
01-06-21 02:46 PM - Post#318680
I see no way that plans would be approved for different phases of return, that teams would be allowed to practice to prepare to return and that folks around the different programs around our league would have differing opinions (both differing from each other AND opinions that changed from the same team over time) if the presidents were dead set against this and it was never going to happen. I know what it sounds like when a proposal is DOA and when it has legs. The potential to return had legs. Until many things with the virus all went south at the same time right when a decision had to be made. Then it was, indeed, a really easy decision.
|
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
01-08-21 09:56 AM - Post#318831
Fact Check: Over the past week, approximately 250 games were scheduled with approximately 75% of the games played on a given night on a fairly consistent basis from night to night. For example, 27 of 32 Division I games were played as scheduled last night with 3 of the 5 games cancelled on the West Coast. Not sure, if colleges are learning how to better handle COVID exposure or pure luck although the percentage of games played vs. scheduled has been consistent over the past 2+ weeks. Always good to check reality vs. theory at the end of the day. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
01-08-21 10:18 AM - Post#318833
Here's a reality and data check: Our country is in very bad shape and trends are not encouraging: https://twitter.com/COVID19Tracking/statu s/1347351... |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
01-08-21 12:11 PM - Post#318848
I probably should clarify my position here. I'm not saying that the Ivy League couldn't complete a season (that is, it would be impossible to do so). I'm saying that the Ivy League wouldn't endure the hurdles required to finish a season. The data about the percentage of games being played isn't relevant from the perspective of 75% of games being enough or not to complete a season. The data is relevant from the perspective of whether we would try to administer a season at a time when 25% of games would need to be cancelled and postponed. All other leagues have made the decision to be okay with this (and almost every other D1 team), but I don't believe the Ivy would, nor would most fans blame it. The bubble is a separate question with separate decision points governing it, but I believe even some that support a bubble would not support administering a travel-based season where 25% of games are being cancelled or postponed. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
01-08-21 01:08 PM - Post#318854
Agreed. But we could have created a bubble at Cornell during the 2 months that no one was there. No travel. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
01-09-21 08:58 PM - Post#318924
I probably should clarify my position here. I'm not saying that the Ivy League couldn't complete a season (that is, it would be impossible to do so). I'm saying that the Ivy League wouldn't endure the hurdles required to finish a season. The data about the percentage of games being played isn't relevant from the perspective of 75% of games being enough or not to complete a season. The data is relevant from the perspective of whether we would try to administer a season at a time when 25% of games would need to be cancelled and postponed. All other leagues have made the decision to be okay with this (and almost every other D1 team), but I don't believe the Ivy would, nor would most fans blame it. The bubble is a separate question with separate decision points governing it, but I believe even some that support a bubble would not support administering a travel-based season where 25% of games are being cancelled or postponed. This is indeed the question. What does it mean they “wouldn’t endure the hurdles†and the Ivy wouldn’t be ok with 25%� The reality is all other schools made the decision to try, not knowing how many games would get played. The Ivy decided not to try. To say they did try is contradicting the actual evidence. The easiest decision to make was the one they made. Anything else would have required meaningful discussion about protocols, procedures, testing availability and practices. All these other schools did that. The Ivy did not. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
01-09-21 09:22 PM - Post#318927
No. The easiest decision would have been to cancel the entirety of the 2020-21 athletic season when it cancelled fall sports. Instead the Ivy created protocols for how it would allow its athletes and practice for a season that still could have been played. It created the tracking and monitoring to trigger progression (or regression) through the phases. It continued as its teams made it out of Phase 0 and then fell back again. To me, all of that is “trying.†You seem to believe that “trying†only starts with actual games. That’s a difference of opinion we’ll have to accept. But they clearly didn’t make the *easiest* decision, which would have been to wholesale cancel the 20-21 athletic season and not even bothered with establishing how teams could practice and ramp up. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
01-10-21 12:51 AM - Post#318929
I apologize in advance, but I'm trying to work things out in my head as I write this. I believe Cornell, Dartmouth and Harvard were at Phase 2 when the winter sports were canceled in mid-November. I'm not sure if Brown had moved into Phase 2 by that time, but seemed to be moving in a positive direction. Yale had been at Phase 2, then moved all sports back to Phase 0 after several men's hockey players tested positive in mid-October. Later, it was reported they would not move any sport beyond Phase 1 for the rest of the semester. Columbia, Penn and Princeton were all at Phase 0, since they did not welcome students back to campus in the fall. At the time of the mid-November decision - If the Ivy League was like other conferences, Brown, Cornell, Dartmouth and Harvard would have continued on to see if they could successfully move to Phase 3. Yale would have returned and attempted to move to Phase 2. Also, the other three schools would have brought their athletes back to try to move forward. If the teams were able to move forward successfully, then the decision would have been which sports would be played (all or a select group) and the timing/format for the seasons (traditional travel schedule or adjusted travel schedule if all sports; traditional travel schedule, adjusted travel schedule or bubble if select sports). If the projected cancelation rate for a travel schedule was determined to be too problematic from a health & logistic standpoint, then a decision would be made between canceling all sports or trying to have a select group of sports in a bubble format. If the cost & logistics of a bubble were too problematic, then no sports would be done. In my opinion, the league seems to have made several decisions as it attempted to have winter sports: Not to prioritize athletes over other students Not to prioritize any sport over another Not to put student and staff health at risk with a travel schedule Not to put the necessary significant resources into creating one or more bubbles Make a season long decision in mid-November, instead of waiting a few more weeks to see the status of league winter programs, national winter programs and the rest of the region/nation. If those opinions are correct, then I feel the ultimate decisions were objectively equitable and understandable, erring on the side of caution. I just wished the ED would have been more forthcoming with her explanations. (Subjectively, I will admit that I would have liked to see if a safe short-season bubble for basketball and/or hockey could have been done) |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
01-10-21 09:50 AM - Post#318935
I believe that the IL gave careful consideration if Winter Sports could be played. My opinion, based on what has actually occurred over the past several weeks is that they could and should have started the season. Once again, over the past two days with a very high volume of games, 75% of the games are being played. Games are being played and that is reality whether one wants to accept it or not. I agree with your thoughts that some Presidents were not fans of playing sports if students were not on campus in the classroom as it is an outlier in their belief system. An excuse for Il Presidents are economic concerns as that argument has zero credibility and is almost laughable to a non-IL fan. As an IL icon shared with a friend, he never believed that IL Presidents would support playing sports during the pandemic based on where sports fit in the pecking order of the IL. I know my non-IL friends believe the same thing about the IL. I listen to a fair amount of conversation about how the NCAA does not treat student athletes fairly. Why I disagree with the IL President's decision is that the IL Presidents could have given Knight, Schwiegger, Parker and Littlefied one more opportunity to play IL BB. For the underclassmen to watch everyone else play in this country while they sit would leave me with mixed emotions as a student athlete. If only 75% of the games were played, so be it as every other conference has accepted the possibility and IL Presidents are concerned about the purity of sports???? In retrospect, the decision turned out to be a wrong one as to not giving it a try based on subsequent empirical evidence. It could have been the right one if reality turned out differently. I am sure that it was a tough call albeit a wrong call as to at least not trying to play. The suggestion that the IL President's decision will not have a negative impact on IL sports, at least in the short-term, is wishful thinking. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
01-10-21 10:19 AM - Post#318936
Just to be clear, when you say that 75% of games are being played, you understand that what you’re also saying is that 25% of games have one or both teams with a known or presumed outbreak of a pandemic virus, right? It’s not like there’s a big snowstorm, and we have to decide whether the games will go on or not. It means that the players, coaches and/or staff have a confirmed or presumed COVID-19 infection. |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
01-10-21 03:11 PM - Post#318956
Daily Beast just posted an article entitled: "Players Rip a '#%$@ Corrupt' College Football Season." |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
01-10-21 03:12 PM - Post#318957
Hey, the filter on this site just 'bleeped' out the literal title of the article - I didn't. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
01-10-21 06:12 PM - Post#318967
Duh - yeah?? IL Presidents made the correct call to cancel the IL BB tournament last March and other conferences followed their lead. This year, all other conferences took a different approach than the IL. We are now roughly 1/3 or more thru the season with plans to play the NCAA Tournament in a bubble. The NCAAF championship game is Monday night and the NFL playoffs have started. The NBA is in full swing. The reality is that the IL President's decision was an outlier to what others have done. Several people have stated on this forum and the NCAAM season would be a very short one. Some suggested that the other College Presidents were simply reckless and were only interested in the "gold". Occasionally, some have even recently suggested that the season will be shutdown due to the uptick in COVID activity. Now, we occasionally hear about the notion that playing 75% of IL games would simply not be acceptable. Others have supported the notion to give the BB IL season a try and if circumstances had changed, shut it down and other conferences probably would have the done the same based on facts/reality. If NCAAM BB would have been shutdown in the first 30 days, it would have supported the decision of IL Presidents. Logically, the converse holds true. As no one is going to change anyone's minds at this point and time, it is probably a good time to fade away from the conversation when reality is simply discarded. It will be a lot more fun talking about how IL BB teams and players are doing versus this circular conversation. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
01-10-21 07:11 PM - Post#318968
Okay... I think you *heard* what I said, but you didn't *process* what I said. If 75% of games are being played... 25% of games are being cancelled or postponed... which means, that in those games either one or both of the teams have players (or coaches, staff) that have contracted a virus during a pandemic. Now, I know the numbers nationally are huge, and that has desensitized us to the notion of catching a virus during a pandemic, but no matter how "survivable" the virus is, I'd hope we can still all agree that it's better not to catch it than to catch it. And what's also clear at this point is that lots of teams that are playing basketball are catching and transmitting the virus, likely in large part through the athletics-related activities they're undertaking. That's not good for anyone. The student-athletes, their coaches and the communities surrounding them. The Ivy League doesn't need the March Madness win share $$$ nor does it have a big TV contract to play for, so it doesn't face the same math that other conferences do, and thus it has a different decision set than those conferences. Conferences that need the TV contract and the NCAA that needs the March Madness money are going to continue for precisely the reason that you pointed out - that even with 25% of games being cancelled, 75% aren't and that's enough to keep the progress going toward the lucrative conclusion. There are plenty of dumb ways the Ivy League "pretends" to be different than other leagues that are often quite punitive for no true idealistic gains. Like an embarrassing number. But this isn't one of them. I'm sorry that you and a handful of other folks can see that. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
01-11-21 11:21 AM - Post#318998
There are many more people than "a handful" scratching their heads on this decision. I'm sorry if you can't see that. |
|
Ever True Junior Posts 255 |
01-11-21 02:37 PM - Post#319007
I'm sure that some will not agree with the framework of "racial capitalism" that this article uses or will feel that seven players is not a significant enough sample, but, nonetheless, this article was eye-opening to me: https://www.thedailybeast.com/players-rip-a-#%$@... I wish that we had Ivy League basketball this year, but I'm glad that the league acted out of an abundance of caution. I look forward to a 2021-2022 basketball season where I can enjoy watching the Ivies play again with the knowledge that the student-athletes are not at risk of contracting a potentially life-changing, or even life-ending, virus. |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
01-11-21 05:49 PM - Post#319051
A friend of mine who is an adminstrator in the NYC school system just let me know that their numbers are increasing dramatically and he can't understand why they opened after Thanksgiving. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
01-11-21 06:05 PM - Post#319058
I think that by over 90% here, no one thinks would should have attempted a normal schedule. But the bubble would have shown everyone else how things can be done right, and the Presidents blew it off with high sounding BS, such as the need to treat all students equally. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
01-11-21 09:14 PM - Post#319081
You've been repeating numerous times about the bubble - and I will be the first to say that a bubble would of course work. It's been proven. If you put healthy people in a bubble, they will not get sick. You aren't revealing anything new there. Why you aren't getting any resonance is that it is a pipe dream. Can you name a college sport, college activity, or college academic program that has organized anything remotely resembling this? Athletes may be willing to do it and might even be grateful to, but it would be an inordinate burden on the schools to plan this, and it would be at the expense of the managerial time to plan basic academic programs for the whole school. I have some direct exposure to what it is taking for schools to function, and you just wouldn't believe the amount of work and decisions to make just to keep academic programs. How will we feed students safely? How will we care for our elder employees? Which employees will we fire if students aren't on campus (i.e. facilities personnel, transportation employees, etc.). How will we make the school budget work? Diverting that effort to make a bubble basketball season is a complete pipe dream, albeit one that could have worked if anyone focused on it. I don't think any Ivy had any interest in doing this. The other NCAA schools have more of a financial incentive through TV contracts, which is the only reason college basketball is playing right now. You think the other schools are playing for the benefit of athletes? These schools have clearly have not paid and organized sufficiently the safety of the athletes and the downstream communities, so it's hard for me to believe that was their primary objective. I fully recognize that society needs to make decisions about risk vs. reward of a pandemic, but I don't think you realize how hard it is to organize the things you would have hoped for - it would have been an unacceptable effort for the league to manage in the time it had - especially as numbers mushroomed. You can keep repeating "bubble, bubble, bubble" but it would be like me saying "vaccine, vaccine, vaccine" in time to save the season. It just wasn't going to happen, even though that would have worked too.
I think that by over 90% here, no one thinks would should have attempted a normal schedule. But the bubble would have shown everyone else how things can be done right, and the Presidents blew it off with high sounding BS, such as the need to treat all students equally. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
01-11-21 09:25 PM - Post#319084
Horse Manure. It was not at all difficult to bring men's and women's hockey and basketball to Cornell, WHERE THERE WERE NO STUDENTS, house them, feed them and pay a few officials to stay for 6 weeks. It's just inconceivable how you make a simple set of arrangements into nuclear physics. |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
01-11-21 09:37 PM - Post#319086
Priorities. Bad Optics. Poor principles. Proof? It could be accomplished but they opted not to do it. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
01-11-21 10:43 PM - Post#319091
How will a one-city NCAA tournament work? This hockey conference offered a glimpse https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketba ll/story... - The National Collegiate Hockey Conference, an eight-team league stretching from Oxford, Ohio, to Colorado Springs, Colorado, played the first portion of its season in what it called a "pod," held in Omaha, Nebraska, from Dec. 1-21. The NCHC moved the entirety of its operations during that period to Omaha's Aksarben Village and Baxter Arena, a multipurpose facility that is typically home to the University of Nebraska Omaha's men's hockey program, as well as its basketball programs. NCHC commissioner Josh Fenton was charged with pulling together the event, as he tried to keep an entire season from falling apart. "I think the goal from the start and the goal for the whole year is that we just want to keep playing hockey games and providing the competitive experiences that these guys want and deserve," Fenton told ESPN during the event. "I think the commitment you see from the membership prior to us getting here and now that we're here, with everybody following the protocol and understanding what they have to do to ensure that we can continue to play games -- that's kind of how our membership has always operated." - - Every person termed a "Tier 1" participant, which were those essential to the tournament -- players, coaches, on-ice officials and conference staff -- had to undergo testing upon arrival in Omaha. That included individuals who were confirmed to have previously been infected in the months prior, even though risk of reinfection is believed to be low. For those known to be infected at some point in the past year, additional testing was conducted to ensure there was no active virus remaining in their systems. The NCHC successfully cleared all athletes from all eight schools for participation and did not postpone any scheduled games within the Pod -- going 38-for-38 in that respect over the three-week event. - - Once the event was underway, teams were tested every game day, with those scheduled to play games early in the day undergoing testing the day before. While there was no outside security to ensure players and staff were obeying protocols, each NCHC team had a designated compliance officer who had to report any issues to the league. Fenton received status updates from each team's compliance officer daily. According to the NCHC, most of the issues were minor. Some were as simple as having to remind players to wear their masks. Players were expected to stay between the hotels and the arena. - - Fulfilling academic requirements in a three-week bubble situation was another concern NCAA tournament participants will face. North Dakota had finals scheduled in the middle of the NCHC event, and UND coach Brad Berry said players were able to consult with their university advisers from inside the pod. The coach also said he made it clear to all of the players that they needed to communicate with their professors before the event, and while it was ongoing, to stay up on assignments. Nebraska Omaha made academic advisers available to players in the pod. Minnesota Duluth players Noah Cates and Hunter Lellig said they had to commandeer a suite in the hockey arena before practice to record their portion of a human resource management presentation. "That was definitely a different kind of experience, but whatever it takes to play," Cates said. "I never thought I'd be doing a final presentation in Baxter Arena in Omaha, but we got it done and it's all good." - |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
01-12-21 10:52 AM - Post#319110
A friend of mine who is an adminstrator in the NYC school system just let me know that their numbers are increasing dramatically and he can't understand why they opened after Thanksgiving. They opened because zoom education is not good enough and ESPECIALLY hits people of color worse. Staying at home for a year is a disaster that FAR outweighs the risk to young children. It's not even close. it's not like no one would be getting sick if we were at home. The comparison is never "x people got sick in school to zero would have gotten sick otherwise". Playing a game is debatable. Education of young children is not. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
01-12-21 11:03 AM - Post#319111
The other NCAA schools have more of a financial incentive through TV contracts, which is the only reason college basketball is playing right now. I am pretty sure The Big South, The Southwest Athletic Conference, the Ohio Valley Conference, etc, etc, (who are all having seasons with double digit games played) are not playing games to generate revenue from TV contracts. Alos, many D3 schools have figured out how to play. There is only 1 D1 conference in the country that didn't even try. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
01-12-21 11:11 AM - Post#319113
I'm really sorry to hear that the public health "issue" "argument" doesn't seem sufficiently compelling for you, or, for that matter, many others. This dismissive attitude is certainly contributing to the predicament we continue to face today. We're all in this boat together. When I say the "public health" issue doesn't hold water to me, I wanted to take a week or two break because you're so aggressively annoying in this thread I needed to process it. Please read this and STFU with the shaming. https://twitter.com/zeynep/status/1348702 563986759... Now, what I'd like to understand with respect to the public health issue: are we sure that playing basketball or football leads to more infections than not playing for both athletes and community? Because the base case certainly is NOT zero. The base case is that these athletes are going to live their lives and, as young people do, socialize. So it seems plenty conceivable that it would be WORSE for the community if young people have nothing to keep them from contracting the virus. Peer pressure, constant testing, etc. might lead the athletes to make less risky decisions in terms of the virus. In fact, the only people who would definitely be at risk there are the folks who are so scared of the virus, like PN, that they know they aren't going anywhere. I've certainly felt compassion for some athletes at bigger schools or in pro sports who would not want to play but feel forced to for their livelihood. This is mitigated at an Ivy school where playing a sport does not affect FA. If there is data that shows that kids don't contract if there are no sports to play or that community spread is much worse, by all means, share it and this becomes moot. But NBA players went off during the offseason and like 10% of players contracted in 2 months. All that said, I don't really want to play. But the paternalism is just enough. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
01-12-21 12:14 PM - Post#319122
Don't know why you have to insult me to state your case, such as it is. You're right--there's really no reason why these college football games would be anything to be worried about: https://www.tmz.com/2021/01/12/alabama-fa ns-tuscal... |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
01-12-21 01:47 PM - Post#319125
not too worried about that happening in the ivies. Because you're acting holier than thou. Knock that ish off. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
01-12-21 02:24 PM - Post#319128
The question of transmission inside a game is something I have been thinking about, as well. Here are two items I found this morning about this. 1/8/21 CIAC (Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference) study: Low rate of COVID transmission due to sports in the fall https://www.journalinquirer.com/sports/ciac-study-... Contact tracing from local health officials found 7 out of 28,842 student-athletes tested positive as a direct result of sports played in the fall. There were more positive cases, but those were determined to have been caused by non-sport events. 133 of the 186 CIAC members (71.5%) responded to the survey. The fall sports included boys & girls cross country (low risk), girls swimming (low risk), 7-on-7 non-tackle football (low-to-moderate risk), field hockey (moderate risk), boys & girls soccer (moderate risk), and girls volleyball (moderate risk). There was no sports breakdown of the 7 sports-related positive cases. For the overall fall positive cases (occurring in sporting & non-sporting events) among those students: Modified Football: 14.695 of players Boys soccer: 13.56% Girls soccer: 10.43% Girls volleyball: 9.62% Field hockey: 6.33% Boys cross country: 4.09% Girls cross country: 2.94% Girls swimming: 2.34% 11/13/20 COVID-19 transmission risk very low in elite sports events, says UK doctor https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-cor onavi... - The chances of transmission of COVID-19 during professional sports events are very low, a British doctor researching the impact of the disease told Reuters on Friday. Chris Orton, a research fellow at London’s Chelsea and Westminster hospital, said there have been no confirmed cases of COVID-19 transmission in the United Kingdom during a training session or live match. - - Orton’s comments come on the same day Ireland midfielder Alan Browne tested positive for the novel coronavirus, less than 24 hours after playing against England in Thursday’s friendly at Wembley Stadium. - - “As far as anyone is aware on a governmental, advisory panel level, there are no confirmed cases of transfer either in training or during sporting activities being performed,†said Orton. “During the circumstances around the games is probably where you are much more likely to contract the virus. The risk to your own team is going to be greater than to the opposition but that does not mean that it is necessarily occurring on the pitch.†- |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
01-12-21 02:25 PM - Post#319129
"Bad optics" and "principles" may exist if you still believe this is 1956 and the original optics and principles of the Ivy League still exist. They do not. Having a safe bubble season for our major sports would provide awesome optics about what we can do with our intelligence and resources. Shutting down loses us our upperclassmen, harms recruiting going forward, and makes us look like risk averse insurance companies. There was no good reason not to consider a bubble. Just no imagination--and nothing new on that front with the Ivy League. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
01-12-21 04:02 PM - Post#319135
If there is data that shows that kids don't contract if there are no sports to play or that community spread is much worse, by all means, share it and this becomes moot. I see that you didn't respond to the NYTimes Magazine piece I posted here a couple of weeks ago which had plenty of data about this very point. |
|
TheLine Professor Posts 5597 |
01-12-21 04:48 PM - Post#319136
Anecdotally that's my experience at my daughter's high school, which is full time in school learning except for quarantined students. There were a small number (less than 10) of cases while athletic teams were still operational. None since NJ shut down high school athletics. COVID numbers in my region overall have correlated quite well with holidays. Went up right after Jewish holidays, assisted heavily by Orthodox community in Lakewood, then dipped until a week after Thanksgiving, when numbers popped significantly. Not enough of a breather to Christmas from there. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
01-12-21 04:50 PM - Post#319137
I didn't. as a rule i don't read 20 minute articles that don't excerpt. But to help you out, I just did. seems like the bulk of your case comes down to the below paragraph. But it's not convincing. It's only convincing to you because you're a shamer. I find it unlikely that these college students partied BECAUSE of the game. I think they decided they were going to party on most weekends and then worked backwards to find a reason to party. Now, I'm somewhat open to the idea broached earlier in the article that this created a permission structure. That all the kids and adults were sitting idly by, properly social distancing and then when they saw football was permitted, they decided that partying must also be permitted. But I'm gonna need a little more put into that one. Also, none of this relates to ivy basketball not played in front of fans. The idea of being social with ivy basketball and students is laughable. "But the cost for that will never be tallied. How many of those Saturday afternoons spent watching football games with friends bear some responsibility for the 100,000 confirmed Covid-related deaths around America since the first snap of a Big Ten game this season? And because we’re still learning about this novel virus, the damage it wreaked on hundreds of players may not become evident for years. The lasting effects of the 2020 college season are unknowable — and for some percentage of Americans, they are beside the point. Eventually, even the most circumspect of fans will return to congregate in bars and living rooms. And the next time a quarterback in Ohio Stadium takes a snap and rolls out while looking toward the end zone, the voices of a hundred thousand spectators will shout as one." |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
01-13-21 01:59 AM - Post#319165
That is not true. Each conference has its own television contracts, and some of these conferences may not have massive contracts. You might be surprised by some though, as regional networks still need sports content and some small conferences may still have regional fan bases. Beyond that, though, the NCAA basketball tournament revenue (estimated over $700M) gets split between conferences and schools. While the exact splits of schools are determined by conference, it is often even per school within a conference. Conferences that have teams advance further get a larger share (which would generally not be the Ivy League). At a minimum, every school gets a few hundred thousand from the tournament. A single cinderella team can bring home millions for EVERY school in the conference. Furthermore, the NCAA would have a massive deficit if the tournament did not occur. Would other NCAA programs need to be cut without the tournament? Would colleges be asked to subsidize the NCAA? NCAA income is often a bigger percentage of sports revenue for smaller schools than bigger ones that have fat conference TV contracts. It doesn't take very much revenue to be important for colleges. Keep in mind that for each bit of revenue lost, they have to decide what to cut, as almost all are non-profit and have reasonably balanced operating budgets. Some people on this board think that all of this is so easy. Why do you think Stanford, one of the richest schools, canceled 11 sports teams? Jobs are being lost and students are losing their sport forever - not just for this year. Schools are having to refund certain expenses - dorms, meal plans, etc., and are having to decide whether to fire, furlough, or take losses to offset the loss of revenues. These budgets are massive. Do you think that the Penn Hospital's earnings were affected by Covid-19, especially for all of its medical specialists? Is philanthropy going to be there to support grants? If not, should researchers be fired? How much financial aid should they provide in an unpredictable year? Should they keep buildings open and incur operating expenses when most students are remote? Should they then fire security, buildings and grounds people? Should they pay field hockey coaches if the season is canceled? Should they keep the stadium open and maintained if sports are canceled? Do they need to reduce enrollment to accommodate in-person learning? How should elderly faculty be accommodated? Should they be paid if they can't attend? What kind of health policies need to be implemented? There is so much more going on at Universities than basketball. At the Ivies in particular, they take far greater importance and they can probably save money, avoid controversy, and avoid unknown downstream health risks. They also avoid a phalanx of protest from other athletes if basketball is the only sport of the season that is allowed to play. In a year of exploding covid numbers, basketball is as much risk, expense and nuisance for the ivies than reward. They won't even have enough basketball revenue with covid to pay the people to keep the Palestra open, let alone pay for a bubble. Should that bum out many of us on this board? Sure. But saying they could have done it is useless. While true, they also could have brought every students to campus safely all year if they were confident they could get all of their health policies right in time. It was all possible, but it just wasn't going to happen. If you REALLY put yourself in the shoes of an Ivy President, you probably have come to the same decision. If not, it is likely biased by your love of college basketball. Our Ivy Presidents would do so many things differently if they shared our love of the sport. They just don't, and that is why there is no season and they were never close to a bubble - ever. That is why I think it is ridiculous to pine on about it.
The other NCAA schools have more of a financial incentive through TV contracts, which is the only reason college basketball is playing right now. I am pretty sure The Big South, The Southwest Athletic Conference, the Ohio Valley Conference, etc, etc, (who are all having seasons with double digit games played) are not playing games to generate revenue from TV contracts. Alos, many D3 schools have figured out how to play. There is only 1 D1 conference in the country that didn't even try. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
01-13-21 03:29 AM - Post#319167
That was a lot to type. The main point above was that this was a business decision. It wasn't a decision based on what could be done. It wasn't about basketball. It wasn't about the basketball players' individual interests. It certainly wasn't about alumni fans. It was about revenue, costs, liability, appearances (from a health and fairness standpoint), and perhaps the advice they were getting about health from their expert panels. I'm not on a soap box about spread of covid-19 (though I have opinions on that). I have agreed a bubble could have worked. It is possible to organize basketball safely. Yes, there is health detriment from people staying home, but university presidents aren't responsible for people's declining health at home. They are responsible for the healthy environment and cost of health services of students on campus. Other schools came up with different choices, and I'm sure they were also being rational. Each has their own financial and operating considerations. Each are impacted differently from the loss of basketball. The Ivies were not negligent or illogical in their choice. I bring this up because I am involved with a school and many just have no idea where this stacks in a truly insane list of considerations that needed to be solved. For some, the equation is clearly the other way. Even many smaller schools have regional TV contracts that they will breach, and they could lose NCAA money too. That may have been a factor in their choices. They also just probably prioritize sports differently. The fact that many were doing distanced learning probably didn't help. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
01-13-21 08:32 AM - Post#319169
I do not believe financial considerations (in terms of the cost of putting together the bubble and playing the games) were any factor whatsoever. Properly marketed, the only college basketball bubble would have had a built in viewing and betting market. It would have made money when all is said and done. But liability worries and ridiculous "perceptions" of the fake Ivy League ideal shot it down before it even was considered. And that's what bothers me. We need to thoroughly revise the Ivy agreement and bring it into the 2020s. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
01-13-21 12:17 PM - Post#319185
Again, this it’s wrong. How much money do you think the ivies make on gambling? Who will pay them? Sports betting data and results are generated by a Netherlands based company that puts one person with an iPad to keep score and betting statistics watching a game. I’ve met with them. They are not paying the schools. Yes they could have marketed streaming viewers, but the Ivy League did such a fine job with that with the old streaming service. ESPN already owns rights with the league, and my guess is that the league didn’t get much for it - they just wanted to take running sports media of their own plates and provide coverage so people like us would stop complaining. Everyone is so convinced they know what’s right, but they have not seen the school budget. They have not seen financial budgets of a tournament, with no tickets sold. They have not seen how many other jobs and programs universities are fighting for right now. They have also not seen the forecasts by their health experts of how many will get sick or die as a result of their actions. The ivies made a decision with all of that data, and I don’t think it was close. They may have struggled with it, but the choice was clear. Why didn’t other conferences make a bubble instead of the way they are handling it? I’m not aware of a single conference that did it, even though it definitely would have been possible somewhere in the country. Is that enough evidence? You keep bringing up hockey. I am guessing that hockey budgets had a completely different set of issues. Perhaps they would have had to cancel their hockey programs and fire coaches without a tournament. Perhaps they needed to honor specific contracts or earn enough to keep athletes’ scholarships. No one has done it for basketball. Real jobs are being lost, real lives are being lost or put at risk, and none of us even knows the long term effects of covid. Money is being lost at institutions that don’t know how to deal with an unbalanced budget. People are complaining that students are not on campus. People are complaining if they are. Students are dealing with visa issues. Labor unions are complaining about safety, pay, and job security. Meanwhile, the schools still needed to figure out how to run classes well enough in distance or hybrid style. I’m not a bit surprised by the decisions. I am also mourning the loss of the season like all of you. The real reason I would have liked to see a season is simply Jelani Williams. Still, regardless of our political views and beliefs about covid, we really need to get a life away from this!
I do not believe financial considerations (in terms of the cost of putting together the bubble and playing the games) were any factor whatsoever. Properly marketed, the only college basketball bubble would have had a built in viewing and betting market. It would have made money when all is said and done. But liability worries and ridiculous "perceptions" of the fake Ivy League ideal shot it down before it even was considered. And that's what bothers me. We need to thoroughly revise the Ivy agreement and bring it into the 2020s. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
01-13-21 12:29 PM - Post#319187
The student athletes deserve better. Their lives, during the 4-5 years they play, revolve around being a student AND being an athlete. There are different priorities and agendas for each school. As complicated as you'd like to make it, the fact remains that 357 schools play D1 Basketball and all but about 12 (8 of them in the IL) have figured out how to play a season right now. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
01-13-21 12:45 PM - Post#319188
20 minutes of hysterical typing doesn't change the fact that at no greater cost than a regular season, given there would be no travel, we could have had a bubble at student-less Cornell while the student athletes could have continued to take their virtual classes. And even if it cost a few hundred thousand dollars more (which I doubt), this is the Ivy League--they have the money. It has nothing to do with anything you mention. And frankly, raising all the problems with society and business relating to the pandemic is why so many people are p.issed off. We run a completely risk averse society without any weighing of options and possible outcomes. That is what has destroyed business and lives as much as the pandemic itself. The fact is that we blew it a year ago, when there was a chance to contain it. At this point, with the closures that destroy businesses, we are losing 4000 people a day. Ivy basketball and hockey won't change that number an iota. So let's keep our eye on the issue and not irrelevant fears. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
01-13-21 02:32 PM - Post#319191
OK. You're 100% right. You've completely convinced me. I was all wrong, and nothing I said had ANY merit. You win. You also get the winning last word, as it must be. Congratulations. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
01-13-21 02:49 PM - Post#319192
From hysteria to passive aggressiveness. You're a piece of work. Try going back to your post and tell me a single fact that you stated there. I'm happy to debate facts. |
|
Old Bear Postdoc Posts 3998 |
01-13-21 05:56 PM - Post#319197
I agree with p'38 that a bubble might have worked for BB. I often do agree with him. However, I doubt the Presidents would consider a bubble for one Winter sport or even a few. Wouldn't you have to do it for all Winter teams, and perhaps Spring as well? I think the League made the correct decision. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
01-13-21 09:59 PM - Post#319215
P38 says I haven't offered facts. He said the ivies could have earned money from gambling. I can name the exact company (SportRadar) which is the biggest sports betting data company, and they don't pay a cent to our schools. One of your arguments for generating revenue has been obliterated. The league does not have access to betting revenue. He says they easily could have done the bubble at Cornell. None of us knows what was said at the meetings, but here's a fact. Cornell was in the room and didn't convince them to pursue this option. They could have had the bubble in my living room too, but that wasn't going to happen. That is an absolute fact. He says it wouldn't have cost much more to do a bubble. He's overlooking that this is as much about lost revenue as additional costs. Here are some facts: Basketball revenue will be lower in a bubble than in prior years. Here's another. Nat Graham is sitting at a security desk in a building right now while he makes his recruiting calls. This is how his job is being saved this year while the school makes its budget. - Other facts: - Even smaller conferences (Big South and Ohio Valley Conference) have long term ESPN athletics contracts. - The NCAA basketball revenue (estimated at $700M) would be split with conferences and schools and many had a lot to lose if there was no tournament. The TV contracts require the games be played. - Stanford, one of the richest schools, has canceled 11 sports. - Schools are dealing with lost revenue from housing and food. - People are dying, jobs are being lost, and schools are dealing with a lot of other issues, etc. - I also invite any of you to challenge the following conjecture: - No one on the group has seen all of the budgets for the schools, athletics, and a bubble. You don't have to agree with the Ivy decision. You don't have to agree with me. But are those enough facts P38? If all you're seeing is still horse manure maybe you should pull your head out... |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
01-13-21 10:14 PM - Post#319216
I need not respond to hysteria. No, you have cited no facts. The fact is that a bubble would result in no harm. I never said almost anything that you supposedly say I said. But it isn't worth responding further. You are emotionally overwrought with the idea that because people are dying from covid, we shouldn't attempt a safe season. It's just a ridiculous argument. (" People are dying, jobs are being lost, and schools are dealing with a lot of other issues, etc.") Do you realize how ridiculous you sound? We lose money on sports every year---we wouldn't lose more by a bubble. But money should not be the issue for the richest universities in the USA. Now just cool out and stop making this your life purpose to criticize the idea of pursuing a bubble. It didn't happen, because Ivy Presidents agree with you that it will offend those with sensibilities that when people are dying, no one should do anything. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
01-13-21 10:20 PM - Post#319217
So which of my supposed facts do you dispute? You've said I've provided none. Go ahead and pick out a single one to disprove. I'm not overwrought. I'm just sick of hearing bubble bubble bubble. I actually would have been fine if the league decided to have a season, in fact. I just don't think I can condemn their decision.
I need not respond to hysteria. No, you have cited no facts. The fact is that a bubble would result in no harm. I never said almost anything that you supposedly say I said. But it isn't worth responding further. You are emotionally overwrought with the idea that because people are dying from covid, we shouldn't attempt a safe season. It's just a ridiculous argument. (" People are dying, jobs are being lost, and schools are dealing with a lot of other issues, etc.") Do you realize how ridiculous you sound? We lose money on sports every year---we wouldn't lose more by a bubble. But money should not be the issue for the richest universities in the USA. Now just cool out and stop making this your life purpose to criticize the idea of pursuing a bubble. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
01-13-21 10:45 PM - Post#319218
Just re-read the statement I highlighted.What on earth do the people dying from Covid have to do with whether the Ivies should have a season. It's like criticizing people for not eating everything on their plate because children are starving in Biafra. I always agreed that a regular season with travel didn't make sense. But to attack me for suggesting that we attempt a bubble for the reasons you set forth was hysterical and overwrought. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
01-14-21 01:36 AM - Post#319220
It is simply a fact that people are dying and jobs are being lost. People on this board have different opinions on college basketball impact in that regard, but it is absolutely a factor as to why organizing a basketball bubble was not the key priority for Ivy universities. If you need proof that basketball was not their key priority, well... they canceled the season. If my rant sounds like hysteria to you, please keep in mind I am not a university president or school administrator, but I'm very involved with an institution trying to figure out how to do everything right. The Bubble bubble talk simply got under my skin because you have no idea how hard the Pandemic is on schools. Seeing this on the front lines, I can say it is very hard to create a safe and effective learning environment in a pandemic is (while balancing a budget). All of the quick judgments about what they should have done are snap judgments. You have not seen what problems need to be dealt with. Doing everything the same as previous years (such as a normal basketball season) is the easy way. Making well reasoned changes is not. On a personal note, I am fortunate enough to have not lost my most near and dear to Covid-19. But the people I do know who were lost - it was shocking how alive they were and how quickly they were gone. They are far more on the forefront of my mind than college basketball. I've been on this board since the usenet days. I think I'm going to sign off and reassess later when we have a real season of basketball. All of the arguments, stubborness, and name calling used to bother me some, but it was never a big deal. This is just too long to sustain with politics and world views looming in the background. I'll admit to being a part of the problem, though I'm not ready to apologize. This is just getting too tiring. See you in late 2021, maybe. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
01-14-21 09:14 AM - Post#319224
Got it....see you then. BTW, I have a kid in 1st year med school virtually so I am very aware of how difficult it is deal with the pandemic with all the competing interests and concerns. I just believe the ADs, who have been sweeping the floors to have something to do along with the coaches, could have gotten this done without overly bothering the academic administrators. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
01-14-21 11:17 PM - Post#319320
NBPA Cardiologist Opens Up About League’s COVID-19 Concerns https://www.si.com/nba/2021/01/13/nbpa-c ardiologis... - Dr. Matthew Martinez: We do. Initially our concern was based primarily on hospitalized, sicker patients with COVID-19, and we were concerned about its effect on the athlete heart, given the potential for myocarditis—or damage to the heart muscle—being a cause of sudden death in athletes. And what we now know is that the prevalence of cardiac involvement among athletes, specifically professional athletes and specifically the NBA players, is unusual. It’s rare. And you’re gonna see that data very soon. We hope to be submitting it by the end of the week. The paper is written. I’m going to dance around exactly what it showed intentionally, but from all the professional leagues that we collaborated [with] in really an unprecedented fashion, what we found is the amount of myocardial involvement was much lower than expected, and really not a whole lot different from what you might expect for viruses in general. - - But it taught us a lot about who needs to be evaluated. And what we found in general was we’re not seeing a lot of cardiac involvement amongst asymptomatic or mild cases of COVID-19. We were also better able to identify what separates a mild case from a moderate case and a severe case, which is pretty straightforward. If you’ve got low oxygen levels and you require a hospital stay, then you’re a severe case. If you’re a mild case, we now define this as symptoms above the neck, so loss of taste or smell, headache, those would be considered above-the-neck symptoms and mild. Moderate symptoms we describe as fevers, chills, if you’re breathless, if you have chest pressure, you fall in that moderate group. - - SI: Given those findings, has the NBA’s safety protocol process changed at all from what it was during the bubble? Martinez: If we test you and find SARS-CoV-2, that you’ve been infected by the virus, then we do three tests. One, an electrocardiogram or an EKG. Two, an echocardiogram, which is an ultrasound that looks at the heart muscle itself. And the third is a blood test known as troponin. And that has not changed from the bubble until now. Even though we know that we’re going to find nothing in the vast majority in that asymptomatic and mild group, we still feel like it’s a little early to be not performing those tests on this group of elite athletes, entirely because we want to make sure the player is safe. We know after the bubble that we haven’t had any significant or bad outcome, and we’re probably not going to identify any new findings, but until we have better data—six months, a year, two years from now—we want to make sure the athletes are safe. - SI: Beyond myocarditis, what are some other possible COVID-19-related conditions you check for and that players might be impacted by? Martinez: So when we think of COVID-19 in the heart, we’re thinking of the muscle disease, the sack around the heart. We know that in hospitalized patients, in non-athletes, we’re seeing clots and thrombosis related to COVID-19. It creates an increased risk for clotting. We know that NBA players clot. But we have not seen an increased signal in the NBA or really any of the professional sports that we’ve seen. And then the other (question) is how is it affecting the lungs? Are we seeing lung damage or increased pressure inside the lungs related to COVID-19 from scarring and damage to the lungs themselves? We have not seen that in any of the athletes we’re screening, but it’s certainly a concern. SI: With games back, players no longer inside a bubble, and the pandemic still raging as strong as it ever has, what do you worry the most about, for NBA players? MM: So far the safety data is reassuring, and I think I’m less concerned now than I was a year ago. I feel very comfortable with the protocol we have in place. I think we’re at a much better place than we were before because we learned a lot in the last six months to a year. And I’m not sure that I have any specific concerns at this point. I’m very proud of the protocol, I think it’s worked very well. And I think that the players should be very satisfied that we’re evaluating them in completeness. - |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
01-14-21 11:17 PM - Post#319321
A look at the Patriot League, from FanNation: Look at the Patriot League, which began the year as a 10 team one division mid-major conference. Because of COVID-issues, the Patriot split into two three-team and one four-team division based on geography, with a baseball style regular season schedule of multiple in-division games and selected out of division games. Still, there have been aberrations because of postponed games, the most startling is that two teams from the Patriot Southern Division (American and Loyola-Maryland) will not play their FIRST game of the year until this weekend. Conference games are held with players wearing masks during the games. Both American and Loyola had games postponed in December and are currently 0-0 |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
01-15-21 09:52 AM - Post#319326
I don't know why you are aiming this at me. At all times, I have opined that the only way to conduct a season was in a 6 week bubble. I never thought it was advisable to take the risks of a "normal" or even modified travel schedule outside of a bubble. |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
01-15-21 08:53 PM - Post#319354
I've noticed. I usually just post, I don't hit reply. The fact that my posts seem to always follow yours is merely a coincidence - or you're posting about your bubble a lot. I've given up on holding the tournament at Mohegun Sun. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
01-17-21 01:53 AM - Post#319399
https://www.espn.com/womens-college-basket ball/sto... - Baylor coach Kim Mulkey, who returned to the sideline Saturday for the first time since Dec. 19, said she is feeling OK physically after having experienced COVID-19. But when asked if she is concerned about this basketball season being completed, she didn't mince words. "The answer is this: The season will continue on. It's called the almighty dollar," Mulkey said after the Bears lost 75-71 to Iowa State in Waco, Texas, ending the longest current homecourt winning streak in Division I women's basketball at 61 games. "The NCAA has to have the almighty dollar from the men's tournament. The almighty dollar is more important than the health and welfare of me, the players or anybody else." "One conference does this, one conference does that. The CDC says this. Everybody is confused. I'm confused. I'm uncomfortable coaching. I understand, COVID is real. I've had it, come talk to me sometime. But I don't know ... all the calls and procedures, that's gonna go on and make it unusual, uncomfortable for every program. We're no different at Baylor." - |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
01-17-21 11:23 AM - Post#319408
So, only the Ivy League could afford to make the safest call. Not taking a health legitimate risk it if you don't have to seems to be a logical choice. Many have faced that dilemma with employment decisions. I believe Harvard was set to allow 40% back to campus last fall but only 25% accepted the offer. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
01-18-21 03:23 PM - Post#319486
UConn's Gino Auriemma responds to the comments about playing during COVID from Baylor's Kim Mulkey. https://www.espn.com/womens-college-basket ball/sto... - "Talking to coaches around the country. Almost nobody gets infected by playing basketball," Auriemma said on a Zoom call. "I think the number of people that contract COVID by playing against somebody, it's been like almost zero. Everything that's happened has happened off the court. "So you mean to tell me these players wouldn't be getting COVID? Matter of fact, coaches are getting COVID at home. If you ask these players, 'Do you want to play, or do you not want to play?' except for a few minor instances, ask the players and 100% of them are gonna say, 'I want to play.'" - |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
01-18-21 04:35 PM - Post#319489
I think Gino has it right. Anyone know the number of Ivy players that have contracted Covid while not playing? I'd bet a lot of money it's not zero. I think the data will show the schools that are playing are no worse off than the ones (Ivy League) not playing in terms of contracting or spreading Covid. |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
01-20-21 11:08 PM - Post#319567
11 top 25 games scheduled for tonight - 7 postponed, Celebrating the inauguration maybe? |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
01-20-21 11:21 PM - Post#319568
Well, this is one team's status. Will see what the deal is with others. https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketba ll/story... |
|
sparman PhD Student Posts 1347
|
01-21-21 04:37 PM - Post#319611
Take following for what it is worth to you. My wife just participated on a call with the CEO of Moderna. He said the following: - His biggest concern about Covid-19 is not the death rate (which he admits is frightening), but the ongoing heart, brain, lung and kidney issues that will afflict a significant percentage of infected people of all ages for their entire lives as a result of the damage the virus causes to certain body tissue. - People who get the Moderna or Pfizer vaccine will not have developed protection against developing symptoms themselves until at least one week after the second dose (so 4 to 5 weeks after the first dose). - Moderna data indicates that vaccinated people still may become infected (with 94% remaining asymptomatic and 6% becoming mildly ill) and have a 60% chance of infecting people around them. - He and the doctors in his company (who have been vaccinated) are NOT eating inside restaurants since they do not think any environment where people take off their masks is safe. They also are not going to stores/doctors, or meeting with anyone outside their households unless it is an absolute emergency. Furthermore, if they do have to leave the house for an emergency, they are wearing N95 masks and face shields, keeping as far away from people as possible, using antiseptic wipes on surfaces, and frequently washing and sanitizing hands. He said they plan to follow this behavior until such time as most of the population is vaccinated because of their concern about becoming infected and spreading the disease to someone else while they are asymptomatic. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
01-21-21 11:02 PM - Post#319619
i wonder if the ceo of moderna realizes that by sounding like a wet sponge, he significantly reduces the likelihood of a marginal person taking the vax? If nothing changes, why bother?* https://twitter.com/DLeonhardt/status/135 121125552... The guy above has it right. The vaccines are great. * I am in the Pfizer vaccine study, this week I was unblinded to learn I had received the placebo and today I received the first shot of the good stuff. In 6 weeks, I'm gonna go into a restaurant and eat. Fight me. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
01-22-21 12:03 AM - Post#319620
Yea,again, how many Ivy athletes were kept from getting the virus by not playing? |
|
1LotteryPick1969 Postdoc Posts 2275
|
01-22-21 09:17 AM - Post#319622
Take following for what it is worth to you. My wife just participated on a call with the CEO of Moderna. He said the following: - His biggest concern about Covid-19 is not the death rate (which he admits is frightening), but the ongoing heart, brain, lung and kidney issues that will afflict a significant percentage of infected people of all ages for their entire lives as a result of the damage the virus causes to certain body tissue. - Moderna data indicates that vaccinated people still may become infected (with 94% remaining asymptomatic and 6% becoming mildly ill) and have a 60% chance of infecting people around them. - He and the doctors in his company (who have been vaccinated) are NOT eating inside restaurants since they do not think any environment where people take off their masks is safe. They also are not going to stores/doctors, or meeting with anyone outside their households unless it is an absolute emergency. Furthermore, if they do have to leave the house for an emergency, they are wearing N95 masks and face shields, keeping as far away from people as possible, using antiseptic wipes on surfaces, and frequently washing and sanitizing hands. He said they plan to follow this behavior until such time as most of the population is vaccinated because of their concern about becoming infected and spreading the disease to someone else while they are asymptomatic. Thanks for posting this. I certainly applaud the sense of social responsibility espoused by the CEO and his physicians, but does it not seem a bit extreme? I am providing routine (not emergency) medical care in my office while adhering to CDC and state mandated guidelines. I think it is the right thing to do. |
|
sparman PhD Student Posts 1347
|
01-22-21 01:21 PM - Post#319641
Could be. My doc also seems to be operating relatively normally, or trying to (interestingly, she called last week to say not to expect a vaccine until late summer, regardless of state-announced eligibility). I suspect people working on vaccines see lots of worst case data that makes them more conservative than some. Also, I would think that when you are speaking to hundreds of influential people, as was the case yesterday, who will then serve as "information multipliers", the possibility of nuance is diminished enough that you want to send the safest message possible. |
|
sparman PhD Student Posts 1347
|
01-22-21 03:17 PM - Post#319654
Or maybe they are looking these new reports about variants: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/uk-var... |
|
1LotteryPick1969 Postdoc Posts 2275
|
01-22-21 05:30 PM - Post#319659
she called last week to say not to expect a vaccine until late summer, So you are in your 30's?  |
|
sparman PhD Student Posts 1347
|
01-22-21 05:51 PM - Post#319660
I was, at one time. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
01-24-21 01:54 PM - Post#319708
Or maybe they are looking these new reports about variants: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/uk-var... Speaking of which, Michigan has shut everything down: https://sports.yahoo.com/michigan-suspends-all -ath... |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
01-24-21 03:19 PM - Post#319710
And perusing the DI schedule today, 17 out of 44 games have been postponed or cancelled. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
01-25-21 11:13 AM - Post#319740
Staying out of the discussion on this topic other than to share factual data as to number of games played over a longer time period other than one given night as there will obviously be fluctuations on any given night. There are nights where 60% of games played and other nights where over 90% games are played. Over the past week, approximately 80% of over 300 scheduled games were played. During the past two weeks, a slightly higher percentage of games have been played (approximately 80%) versus the prior two weeks (approximately 75%) as reflected on ESPN scheduling/games played. Just trying to keep it real. |
|
sparman PhD Student Posts 1347
|
01-26-21 10:22 AM - Post#319763
Interesting joint study by NFL and CDC released today: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm 7004e2.ht... I expect some people will seize upon excerpts rather than consider both the totality and limitations of the report. The thing that struck me was the extent of activity to create the requisite environment. You can see how a pro league, with a single purpose and awash in money, might be suited to undertake it. Seems to me this task is likely more intensive and expensive than many college sports teams can support, although most big time football teams are de facto pro programs already. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
01-26-21 10:27 AM - Post#319764
And yet somehow every single D1 conference and many D3 conferences (most of whom are decidedly not 'awash' in money) have figured out how to have a season to the benefit of the student athletes. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
01-26-21 10:57 AM - Post#319770
Interesting as a pilot study. Clearly more follow up work needs to be done as noted before being able to generalize to a larger extent. On a practical level, large scale contact tracing in this country is simply no longer possible--that ship sailed a long time ago. |
|
sparman PhD Student Posts 1347
|
01-26-21 12:47 PM - Post#319778
You keep saying this, but you also continuously and pointedly refuse to acknowledge the risks are not solely to the athletes but to those around them that the athletes may infect. |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
01-26-21 05:26 PM - Post#319787
Is it really to the benefit of the athletes? I'm thinking of the article in the last couple of weeks where college football players seemed to feel used by the $$$$ system. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
01-26-21 07:35 PM - Post#319792
You keep saying this, but you also continuously and pointedly refuse to acknowledge the risks are not solely to the athletes but to those around them that the athletes may infect. Of course. That's a given. Who needs to repeat that, there's hundreds of posts saying that on here. I don't agree with Jeff2sf much but it was he who said: "because the base case certainly is NOT zero. The base case is that these athletes are going to live their lives and, as young people do, socialize. So it seems plenty conceivable that it would be WORSE for the community if young people have nothing to keep them from contracting the virus. Peer pressure, constant testing, etc. might lead the athletes to make less risky decisions in terms of the virus......If there is data that shows that kids don't contract if there are no sports to play or that community spread is much worse, by all means, share it and this becomes moot. But NBA players went off during the offseason and like 10% of players contracted in 2 months." Every other D1 conference didn't make a decision to play soley based on money, virus be damned, many of them simply worked through it more thoughtfully than the IL did. Many want to give credit for the IL for cancelling the tournament last march and being the first, the same crew want's them badly to be right again. As the season moves on without us, who else is gonna admit they got it wrong? They could have done something more than they considered doing. (I see you P38). The idea they couldn't move to a level of activity that accommodated a season is lazy and defending it as if we somehow knew more is just too arrogant for me. I think we made a huge mistake not trying harder to have a safe season for the kids and those associated the impact of that will last a long time |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
01-26-21 07:59 PM - Post#319793
Pretty funny but KenPom has Yale as the #101 ranked team in the country followed by Princeton and Harvard. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
01-26-21 09:05 PM - Post#319795
The University of Vermont's women's team (4-2) decided to end their season on Sunday. A local paper has details on how the players came to a group decision. https://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/sports/c... - After all the uncertainty, the starts and stops — and the fear of testing positive for coronavirus and the potential health risks that come with it — players on the UVM women's basketball team reached a tipping point. They decided, as a team, they wouldn't resume the 2020-21 season. The school made the announcement Sunday afternoon. "It was the culmination of the unknown, it just took its toll on our players, and no fault to anybody," coach Alisa Kresge said. "This was really a culmination of everything coming to a head in my opinion." - - According to Kresge, players wrestled for weeks with continuing the season or opting out. Kresge called it an internal struggle. "This wasn’t easy. This didn’t happen overnight, there were a lot of factors that went into this," Kresge said. "As a staff, we told them we would be in this with them no matter direction we went in and we totally agree with what they are doing." Players met individually with the coaching staff, with administration and they weighed every option, Kresge said. Kresge said there was no player vote and some players "felt strongly one way or another" but the team came to the decision as a unified group. "There was a lot of communication with themselves," Kresge said. "We really wanted everyone to have a voice and I believe they did. They decided as a team that it wasn’t in our best interests." What were some of the players' biggest concerns? Letting down teammates was high on the list — "They didn’t want to do that to each other," Kresge said — but players also grew tired of quarantine stretches, and worried over their well-being and safety. "If some of them decided to keep playing and their future got cut short because they got sick, that was something that was weighing on them," Kresge said. "The fear outweighed continuing to do this. I think it’s a mixed bag of frustration — they put so much into this, they gave it their all, they sacrificed so much and so much time with family and loved ones and they couldn’t see this through. - - Other UVM teams are not "quite as far as long as women’s basketball" when it comes to potentially pulling the plug on their seasons, Schulman said. "There is no question that individual athletes are having these conversations with coaches and teammates," Schulman said. "I do know some teams have had collective conversations about it." Schulman said he understands what the school is asking of athletes. "We’ve been very clear with everybody from the start, that it really is a personal choice whether they want to participate this year — knowing there are dynamics within teams that people feel a sense of responsibility to their teammates, which is important," Schulman said. "But we really want to make sure students feel freedom to make the choices that are in their best interests." If the COVID situation worsens, UVM could make the decision to forego the remainder of teams' seasons. "We are going to continue to always prioritize the health and safety of student-athletes, coaches and staff," Schulman said. "But also within that context, to make every effort we can to get our teams to the finish line if that’s what they want. "We are not going to do anything that puts the community or anybody at risk," he said. - |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
01-26-21 10:09 PM - Post#319798
As the season moves on without us, who else is gonna admit they got it wrong? YMMV, but I think given how the season has unfolded, they pretty clearly got it right. No one believes the league’s decision was made based on the ability of a season to be completed (right?). The league’s decision was based on a travel basketball schedule being unlikely to be conducted safely and a bubble being impractical. We can argue the latter, but the former has pretty clearly been as challenged as expected. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
01-27-21 12:23 AM - Post#319801
FWIW, PSU AD Sandy Barbour is ok with the risks to her athletes, coaches and staffs. https://www.collegian.psu.edu/sports/men_basketbal... - Despite a 2-5 start to Big Ten play, three games being postponed due to coronavirus concerns and numerous games being rescheduled, Penn State Vice President for Intercollegiate Athletics Sandy Barbour insists playing basketball this season has been worth it. Her main justification is that the season, impossible to be played with zero risk, is being played with "an acceptable" level of risk for student-athletes and everyone else involved. "As long as we can do it [play] safely — that means with an acceptable level of risk because nothing's with zero risk — as long as we can do it safely to give our students the opportunity to to train, to compete, to do what it is they love to do while going to school, we're gonna bust our butts to do that," Barbour said. "So yeah, it's worth it. Every bit of it." - |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
01-27-21 10:36 AM - Post#319809
As the season moves on without us, who else is gonna admit they got it wrong? YMMV, but I think given how the season has unfolded, they pretty clearly got it right. No one believes the league’s decision was made based on the ability of a season to be completed (right?). The league’s decision was based on a travel basketball schedule being unlikely to be conducted safely and a bubble being impractical. We can argue the latter, but the former has pretty clearly been as challenged as expected. How exactly has the season unfolded? How many positive tests are attributable to basketball activities and players traveling? Where's the data to support your generalizations? Where is the study that says NCAA basketball players are testing positive and/or spreading the virus at a higher rate than every other student not playing? Every league but the IL has played home and away games. Somewhere between 70-100% of the games have been completed. Except for a few that have opted out, every team that has started the season will complete it. There will be an NCAA tournament with every league but 1 represented. We couldn't figure out how to have a season but every other league did figure it out and there is no data (that I'm aware of) suggesting it's worse for those playing vs those not playing? Seems like pure arrogance or unrealistic fear to defend this. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
01-27-21 11:18 AM - Post#319810
I take issue with the assertion that they seriously considered a bubble and it was found to be impractical. I do not believe it ever was seriously considered, which lends credence to the prior statement that the risks of playing any kind of season never were objectively analyzed--the decision was made on the basis that sports are not important to the Ivy Presidents and in their view, the "look" of having games being played when the students were not on campus was not acceptable. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
01-27-21 11:59 AM - Post#319813
We couldn't figure out how to have a season but every other league did figure it out Your lens is inherently going to lead you to see the Ivy decision as incorrect. No one is debating that the Ivy League could have successfully completed a season. Nor is the league office itself. That's a strawman bar. The league was never going to endure the stops and starts, postponements and cancellations that a large percentage of teams have had to endure. If the season had started, it would have likely been cancelled by now anyway. And you'd be complaining about that. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
01-27-21 12:57 PM - Post#319817
You have proven my point and the point we all inherently know, which is the league (a.k.a the Presidents) had no interest in figuring out how to do this for the reason P38 just reiterated "...that sports are not important to the Ivy Presidents and in their view, the "look" of having games being played when the students were not on campus was not acceptable" So let's stop pretending the decision was truly considered in any real way. The easy decision, based on the fact that athletics are a low priority, was to simply cancel the season. Based on the priorities, the decision was correct. It was a wrong decision to make if it was based on the science and safety of the players, which it was not. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
01-27-21 01:26 PM - Post#319818
So let's stop pretending the decision was truly considered in any real way. The easy decision, based on the fact that athletics are a low priority, was to simply cancel the season. Based on the priorities, the decision was correct. It was a wrong decision to make if it was based on the science and safety of the players, which it was not. To me, it seems pretty arrogant to suppose you know how a decision was made and the factors that were considered. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
01-27-21 01:49 PM - Post#319820
I think that the public statement (from ESPN) confirms exactly what both of us said: ""We are heartbroken to be here again," Harris said. "It's based on the current trends of the virus and rates and the impact that has on our campus policies that are going to continue to restrict travel, group gathering sizes, visitors to campus. Athletics is important to all of our schools, to our presidents. All aspects of campuses are being asked to make sacrifices and change the way they operate, and unfortunately that has extended into athletics as well." Harris said the league's coaches and athletic directors came up with alternative options on how to conduct a season, including eliminating overnight stays and changing the way they handle meals on the road. While those options would have mitigated the risk to a degree, it wasn't enough. A bubble for the conference was never a legitimate consideration, Harris said." I read this as saying the optics of having the teams on campus playing when everyone else is restricted (and mostly away) were unacceptable and as admitted, a bubble was never even considered. If you are aware of anything supporting that they made an objective determination that the threat of Covid itself was too great for the teams and staff(who clearly were willing to take the risk) I'd like to see where that was ever mentioned anywhere. |
|
westcoast Senior Posts 302 |
01-27-21 04:14 PM - Post#319829
"having the teams on campus playing when everyone else is restricted (and mostly away) was unacceptable" This quote is what many of us have been saying from the beginning. The Ivy League decided that athletes would not play until all other students could return to campus. Seems like a perfectly reasonable plan for a university, but no one except the Ivies decided to take this stance. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
01-27-21 04:58 PM - Post#319832
To me, that is wholly unreasonable and based on the 1956 fiction that the Ivy ideal of the student-athlete who is no different from any other student is remotely close to the truth. As we know, athletes are accepted on a different basis, are given guidance on academics and financial aid on a different basis, are provided with job opportunities and networking on a different basis---in general, they are not the "same" as other students except to the extent the AI requires them to be within a certain range of difference (lower). So the idea that they might be playing (in my view in a bubble which certainly was possible especially when no students were on most of the campuses) while other students are off campus presents no conflict--they too would be attending class virtually. This was all about the optics based on a fictional and idealized view of what the Ivy League actually is in 2020-21. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
01-27-21 05:46 PM - Post#319836
So let's stop pretending the decision was truly considered in any real way. The easy decision, based on the fact that athletics are a low priority, was to simply cancel the season. Based on the priorities, the decision was correct. It was a wrong decision to make if it was based on the science and safety of the players, which it was not. To me, it seems pretty arrogant to suppose you know how a decision was made and the factors that were considered. Well that could ultimately apply to both of us. Depends on how much of this is personal opinion vs reporting. I stand by my comments. |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
01-28-21 09:22 PM - Post#319883
10 of 33 games postponed/cancelled tonight. I would expect that the Ivy League would have shut down under these circumstances. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
01-28-21 09:30 PM - Post#319884
17 games already postponed or cancelled for Saturday. |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
01-29-21 01:44 AM - Post#319889
I just closed my office as 2 employees tested positive this week. Asking everyone to be tested this weekend. Wearing a mask at home and quarantining myself. Play ball! |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
01-29-21 09:20 AM - Post#319896
On a separate note, there is active discussion in several of the Power 5 conferences to cancel their conference tournament this year. Their goal is to be ready to play in Indianapolis where obviously the money and prestige resides. One of the conference reps described the process as using the "old" IL format to determine who gets a guaranteed spot into the Big Dance. Establishing conference tournaments was certainly driven by dollars but this year, Power 5 conference may forego. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
01-29-21 12:47 PM - Post#319913
10 of 33 games postponed/cancelled tonight. I would expect that the Ivy League would have shut down under these circumstances. Captain Obvious, The Ivy League would of course have shut down, in fact they did shut down before the season ever started. It's not less safe to play a college sport than it is to exist as a normal student in a college town. In fact it's likely more safe. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
01-29-21 12:55 PM - Post#319918
But you've created a strawman, as right now no one is a "normal student" in a college town. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
01-29-21 01:17 PM - Post#319920
Normal student = non athlete. Didn't mean to imply any sense of normalcy in the current environment. Point is, everyone is playing with the same deck of cards and the IL believes they know better everyone else. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
01-29-21 01:27 PM - Post#319921
Point is, everyone is playing with the same deck of cards and the IL believes they know better everyone else. Everyone is playing with the same deck of cards, but the Ivy League has way, way more chips than anyone else at the table, so they have a different decision set. If you need the win share money from the NCAA, you're gonna try like heck to make it work. If you don't need the win share money (and guarantee game money), that gives you more flexibility in decision making. It's just really hard to compare the motivations of those for whom money is a factor and those for whom it isn't. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
01-29-21 01:56 PM - Post#319924
Money is a factor for everyone, including the Ivy League. They have plenty so they can decide to keep athletics a very low priority as usual. I don't think Duke, Stanford, Northwestern, most D3 schools, etc are not playing for the money. That generalization serves as a convenient excuse. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
01-29-21 02:00 PM - Post#319925
...although (correct me if I am mistaken) I thought Mike highlighted the cost of a bubble as a reason it was not seriously considered. The proceeds from an NCAA appearance would have covered that. But since it has happened, it will hurt the Ivy programs for years with the loss of upperclassmen Probably good for Penn, though, since it was coming back with mostly freshmen and sophs. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
01-29-21 02:51 PM - Post#319928
Many colleges haven't had any students on campus at all (or very few) over the past couple of months. So that's really what you'd need to compare--the athletes who are on campus (and in the surrounding community) versus all others who are in a different set of circumstances. |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
01-29-21 04:02 PM - Post#319934
Interesting, seems a group of Yale players are taking time off. They would have lost their Ivy eligibility for the bubble - or we'd still have had some take the year off, further widening the gap between a bubble and reality. Also, if we put basketball in a bubble, what about hockey, etc. It would be a net cost at a time of rising costs and, likely, reduced revenues. Regardless, I don't think this was a financial decision. Priorities and optics were sufficient. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
01-29-21 04:18 PM - Post#319935
That is where we disagree. A properly conducted bubble, with each game televised, would have been tremendous optics. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
01-29-21 05:01 PM - Post#319945
Yet many of those students didn't stay home, they matriculated to the college's town, even with all online classes. Point is, it's not all about the money as some would generalize. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
01-29-21 05:26 PM - Post#319947
I must admit that there are times that these conversations harken back to some of the predictions and economic benefits that were given by some regarding the introduction of IvyMadness. Reality is always a good check against theory. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
01-29-21 07:30 PM - Post#319949
Happy to have conversations about other aspects of this, but I’m not going any further on bubbles here. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
02-01-21 09:58 AM - Post#320071
Fact: Over the past week approximately 300 NCAAM games were scheduled Based on ESPN schedule, almost 80% of the games were played -- it has actually been remarkably consistent on a weekly basis over the past several weeks. The percentage of games played over the past month is slightly higher than the prior month. |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
02-01-21 01:57 PM - Post#320097
80% sounds awesome, but looking at it from the perspective of a team, it means that 1 of every 5 games is postponed or cancelled, or > one else every three weeks |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
02-01-21 02:45 PM - Post#320098
Hmmmm. What do you think the opinion of an Ivy League player would be vs a player from every other D1 conference? Do you think they'd be excited about playing 80% of their games vs zero? Or what about restaurant owners? You think they'd like to be at 80% of capacity? I think man small businesses would be ecstatic at being open 80% of the days. It's a matter of perspective I suppose. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
02-01-21 02:49 PM - Post#320099
I don't think there is any question that virtually all of the players would have chosen to play. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
02-01-21 04:48 PM - Post#320105
By definition, some look at the glass 1/5th empty and others 4/5th filled. Reality is to-date that there has not been an increase in the number of cancelled games even though COVID numbers had spiked. It is what it is. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
02-01-21 05:42 PM - Post#320110
i think this conversation stopped being useful a while ago but what bradley says is exactly right. You all are using the same stat to conclude you're right (I lean closer to PF10 and P38) but here's a better convo... what are those who wanted to play going to do about this going forward? I'm not mad and I might have even been uncomfortable with the kids playing, but what it has shown me is like pro sports, colleges, my college, doesn't give a damn about me or the sports I'm interested in. Which is fine, but why invest dollars in them. And this isn't one of those "I'm never watching another game or spending another dollar" like you see with people throwing tantrums about strikes/lock outs or kneeling for the anthem or whatever. No, I'll still go to some games, I'll still watch some games. But I will care less for a while. And I will shift my spending decisions. I sometimes paid for games that were marginal for my interest because both I was a big fan and because I figured what the heck, money's going to a good "cause". Now I will prioritize my interest and dollars a bit more. I would submit this will cost Penn about 50 dollars a year. To call it a rounding error would be an insult to rounding errors. But if you all just take this, just like you did when they gave you that urinate poor home schedule from 2019-20, they're not going to learn anything. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
02-01-21 05:44 PM - Post#320111
mike get rid of the curse filter for crying out loud. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
02-01-21 08:03 PM - Post#320114
Ha - I can barely split topics right... figuring out what Jake did with the curse filter is definitely a bridge too far. |
|
Old Bear Postdoc Posts 3998 |
02-01-21 08:50 PM - Post#320115
Mike, I’m tired of having to scroll through the first three topics, scolding us for past discretions. Might you be able to do something about that? |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
02-01-21 09:18 PM - Post#320116
Sure! I kept them there for new folks, but we don’t have a ton of those, so I’m fine ditching them. |
|
Go Green PhD Student Posts 1149 |
02-02-21 06:45 AM - Post#320119
Yale men's lacrosse opted out of its 2021 season. https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2021/02/01/mens- lac... |
|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
02-02-21 11:57 AM - Post#320122
Mike, I’m tired of posts saying Harvard’s recruits are better than Penn’s. Can you filter those out?
|
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
02-02-21 10:12 PM - Post#320131
The Yale Men opting out of lacrosse is, to me, far more annoying and wrong with how the league approaches things than the league deciding whether or not they can play. Rather than trying to extend any flexibility to the team ("hey, we'll work with you on eligibility if we cancel"), they instead offer no promises and no help leaving the team with little choice. This is reprehensible but par for the course. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
02-03-21 10:23 PM - Post#320180
NCAA cancels D3 Winter Championships. Not enough member participation to hit established thresholds. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
02-03-21 11:21 PM - Post#320182
The six team National Women's Hockey League attempted a bubble in Lake Placid, but it was shut down before the semifinals and finals (which were supposed to be televised by NBC Sports). The Metropolitan Riveters were sent home on Thursday after hitting the league's threshold for positive cases. On Monday, the Connecticut Whale decided to leave the bubble out of safety concerns. After 5 players and the coach of the Boston Pride tested positive last night, league officials along with the Olympic Regional Development Authority suspended the event. According to Sports Illustrated, a big reason why things failed was because the event was more of a "bubble" than a bubble. https://www.si.com/hockey/news/after-nwh ls-bubble-... - We also know this. These things did not happen in the WNBA, a league that successfully completed its bubble season in October. Nor did they happen in the National Women’s Soccer League, which survived having a team drop out before it became the first pro league to complete its season in July. The NWSL, in fact, got record TV ratings, attracted new sponsors and announced a Los Angeles expansion team backed by actor Natalie Portman. And what was the difference between what the WNHL did and what their basketball and soccer counterparts did? Well, the WNBA and NWSL had a strict protocols and bubbles that were enforced. The WNHL sort of had a bubble that it talked about, then kind of followed, but not really. When the league announced its format, it clearly used the word ‘bubble’ to describe the set-up. But when commissioner Tyler Tumminia spoke about it Wednesday night, she suddenly started using the term, ‘restrictive access environment’. Well, you’re either in a bubble or you’re not. And the NWHL was anything but a bubble. Players from some of the teams did not arrive at the same time in Lake Placid. Teams were allowed to bring players into the bubble after the tournament began. There were reports that, despite the fact players were supposed to be restricted to the rink and the team hotel, some players were seen walking around the town. The league will take some time to contact trace and determine where things went wrong, but it’s pretty clear the protocols weren’t near tight enough, nor did everyone involved follow them. And that was where everything broke down. And because of that, the NWHL is wondering what might have been rather than taking advantage of an enormous opportunity. There were teams that followed the protocols religiously and there were others that were less vigilant. What was supposed to be a bubble was actually a ‘restrictive access environment’ and if people from the NWHL had taken time to get input from the successful leagues, they would have quickly realized there was no way they were giving themselves a chance to be successful without an air-tight bubble. - For those interested, here is the league press conference transcript from tonight: https://www.theicegarden.com/2021/2/3/22265264/tra ... |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
02-03-21 11:44 PM - Post#320186
According to Sports Illustrated, a big reason why things failed was because the event was more of a "bubble" than a bubble. So, a "bubble" myseh? |
|
SRP Postdoc Posts 4911 |
02-04-21 04:55 AM - Post#320191
At least one bogeyman can be laid to rest: The Florida player who collapsed earlier had no COVID involvement. |
|
1LotteryPick1969 Postdoc Posts 2275
|
02-07-21 10:17 AM - Post#320371
Is it too soon to conjecture about fan attendance at IL games next year? Consider the age of the average season ticket holder. I will be 71 myself. I usually attend one or two games a year. But I have difficulty imagining attending a game and sitting next to a stranger, even if I have be (re)-vaccinated. Will we still be wearing masks?? |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
02-15-21 08:04 PM - Post#320783
Over the past week, over 300+ games were scheduled and 80%+ of the games were played with a slight uptick as to the percentage of games played versus cancelled from prior week. From Friday-Sunday (this past weekend), 225 games were scheduled and approximately 85% of the games were played which continued the favorable trend. Obviously, it takes only one team to have issues with COVID to cancel a game. It will be interesting to see what happens in Indianapolis with the so called "bubble" but it does appear that the Big Dance is on track to be played although anything could still happen and might happen let alone if and when the tournament is played. There were a fair number of "experts" who predicted that NCAAM play would have totally stopped a while back. Time will tell. |
|
westcoast Senior Posts 302 |
02-15-21 08:15 PM - Post#320784
Jeff Goodman surveyed 37 possible at-large teams to find out how many scholarship players had tested positive for Covid-19. 241 out of 464 players (53%) had tested positive as of last week. Those numbers include one team that has not had any positive tests, and one team that has had all 13 players test positive. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
02-16-21 10:08 AM - Post#320802
2/15/21 WSJ The Ivy League Is Still on the Sidelines. Wealthy Alumni Are Not Happy. Billionaire Joe Tsai’s rebuffed offer to fund a lacrosse ‘bubble’ is one sign of how pressure is mounting on the conference that never returned to the field. https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-ivy-leag ue-is-sti... Somehow, I was able to read the article once before the paywall blocked me. As a result, I am posting the info below from that first read. Anyone who has a subscription can make any additions or corrections. - Josepth Tsai (co-founder of Alibaba, owner of Nets & Liberty) was a Yale lacrosse player in the 80s. He and the head of the Premier Lacrosse League came up with a plan for a 3 week bubble for men's & women's Ivy lacrosse. Tsai was going to fully fund it ($5 million?) - Tsai brought the plan to Robin Harris, who reportedly was intrigued by the idea. - The plan was quickly rebuffed by the Ivy Presidents because they did not want to have any group having different standards with regards to testing, travel & gatherings. (as an aside, Cornell is doing additional surveillance testing of athletes and members of fraternities/sororities, since those groups have accounted for 2 of the 3 clusters found on its campus since the start of the year - https://cornellsun.com/2021/02/14/athletes-a nd-gre... - A number of wealthy Ivy sports alums have told Harris that they are very unhappy with the way that the league has been the only one to stay on the sidelines this year. (One was an exec with the Bruins Sports Capital, where former Brown AD Jack Hayes now works). |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
02-16-21 10:26 AM - Post#320804
It's absolutely ridiculous that this explanation (which was also tossed out there as a reason why they would not even entertain a basketball and hockey bubble) is the best they can do. The Ivy League is a sports league, not an academic association. As just about everyone knows, sports recruits are not treated identically to all other students yet we keep hearing this fiction that allowing them to play the sport that we recruited them to play is unfair to anyone else. And the Ivies have, as we see here, very very wealthy alumni willing to chip in to underwrite the cost, if any effort were made to raise funds for this purpose. Ugh. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
02-16-21 10:45 AM - Post#320806
Really sad. I would bet the Ivy athletes have tested positive at a higher rate than participating athletes. This was a huge missed opportunity. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
02-16-21 12:42 PM - Post#320818
The differentiated standards between non-athletes and athletes as an inhibitor to staging a season is pretty flimsy as the ONLY decision factor. I could see not wanting to spend or actively raise substantial funds for a bubble and finding a travel season to be a safety concern. I could also see citing an inequity between certain sports getting to proceed and others not. Those are pretty reasonable arguments. But merely saying that anything that differentiates athletes from non-athletes as the core decision point is pretty hollow and only serves to confirm the suspicions of many (including those on this board) that doubt the Ivy Presidents gave much consideration to playing out any part of the 2020-21 season. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
02-16-21 03:27 PM - Post#320829
What's amazing is that people are still stubborn enough to defend the decision. The holier than thou idea that the Ivy Presidents made the right choice and every other school didn't is not aging well. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
02-16-21 03:46 PM - Post#320833
To be fair, it's possible to come to the right decision for the wrong reasons. If the threshold from the very beginning was going to be "exact same standards" for athletes and non-athletes, there was no reason to go through the charade of pretending there was a possibility to hold a season, though. And that would have been a ridiculous threshold to set, even if it led to the right ultimate decision. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
02-16-21 04:19 PM - Post#320834
It is rather amazing that supporters of the IL President's decision to not even try to start the season remain so steadfast despite the reality that NCAAM BB is 2/3 of the way through the completion of the season and going down the home stretch to Indianapolis. Now, IL Presidents' defenders focus on process arguments versus results as to the actual playing of games. One would hope that if NCAAM BB had been shutdown after the first 30 to 60 days, individuals who disagreed with the Presidents' decision would have acknowledged that they were right as they were in cancelling IvyMadness last March. I do not doubt that the Presidents gave careful consideration to their decisions, even the recent one to give players a chance to come back but just because you have a process and consideration does not mean that the right decision was made. To make an argument at this point and time that the decision was a correct one based on actual facts is a bit hard to believe. Bureaucrats can attempt to give reasons why rather than simply acknowledging the obvious that the IL could have played BB this winter with all of the challenges that other schools have faced. I believe that student athletes voices are not well represented or their positions strongly advocated by Robin Harris which is a flaw in the decision making process. |
|
westcoast Senior Posts 302 |
02-16-21 05:02 PM - Post#320836
To make an argument at this point and time that the decision was a correct one based on actual facts is a bit hard to believe. What facts are you referring to? I posted above that over 50% of players playing NCAA basketball this year have tested positive for Covid. Meanwhile, if you look at the overall undergraduate body that has been on the Princeton campus for a month, about 0.2% have tested positive (52 cases out of 24,922 tests). Is the argument that it's OK if 50% of Ivy League athletes test positive, as long as we get to watch sports? |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
02-16-21 05:07 PM - Post#320837
The issue as I saw it was playing in a bubble. That was doable for the Ivies, and as we see with Lacrosse, there almost certainly would have been donors willing to underwrite it. The reason it was not "seriously considered" was that they didn't want to treat athletes differently from non-athletes. I think it's pretty unanimous here that the explanation was exceedingly lame. It simply would have required that the Presidents care about sports. BTW, even those who think we could have attempted a regular season don't think that because they want to watch Ivy sports---it's about the athletes and the long term effect on Ivy programs. We all have lost so much during this pandemic in life's enjoyments that missing a season of Ivy ball is the least of our troubles. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
02-16-21 05:33 PM - Post#320839
To make an argument at this point and time that the decision was a correct one based on actual facts is a bit hard to believe. What facts are you referring to? I posted above that over 50% of players playing NCAA basketball this year have tested positive for Covid. Meanwhile, if you look at the overall undergraduate body that has been on the Princeton campus for a month, about 0.2% have tested positive (52 cases out of 24,922 tests). Is the argument that it's OK if 50% of Ivy League athletes test positive, as long as we get to watch sports? I am not a professed empiricist, but your data analysis seems wrong. Are you saying that half of NCAA basketball players tested positive while in season with protocols and testing? Where is the study? I'd like to see it. And the fact that .2% of Princeton students have tested positive is exactly why they should have had a season. the protocols and testing make it safer than they otherwise would be. I am pretty sure half the Penn basketball team has had covid (non scientific representation). Your argument suggests that 50% of athletes got Covid because they play basketball vs other students who don't play and I call BS on that. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
02-16-21 05:47 PM - Post#320840
The stats in this article don't jive with the 50% myth. And, mental health issues are ravaging college athletes: https://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media -center/... COVID-19 testing and precautions Division I student-athletes reported being tested for COVID-19 more frequently than those in Divisions II and III. Ninety-four percent of Division I respondents reported being tested, with 14% having tested positive for the virus at some point. In Division II, 82% reported taking a COVID-19 test, with 15% testing positive, while 74% of the Division III respondents said they took a test, with 8% testing positive at some point |
|
westcoast Senior Posts 302 |
02-16-21 05:57 PM - Post#320842
I am not a professed empiricist, but your data analysis seems wrong. Are you saying that half of NCAA basketball players tested positive while in season with protocols and testing? Where is the study? I'd like to see it. It's not a study, but an unofficial survey from Jeff Goodman (who follows college basketball as closely as anyone). He polled 37 potential NCAA at-large teams, and they reported that 241 out of 464 players (53%) had tested positive. https://twitter.com/GoodmanHoops/status/1 360252820... |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
02-16-21 06:15 PM - Post#320845
From the NCAA website: Ninety-four percent of Division I respondents reported being tested, with 14% having tested positive for the virus at some point. I think that's a little more reliable than a Jeff Goodman tweet. We don't know if Jeff Goodman's poll is just for athletes in season or not. I doubt it is. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
02-16-21 06:59 PM - Post#320850
If one listened to any college basketball or football coach this past year, everyone talked about how many times every one of their players were tested during a week/season and how they crossed their fingers/toes regarding the results. If the entire student body or general population was tested as much as college athletes, how different would be the outcome between these different groups??? The more testing, the higher will be the COVID percentages. I went to Wegmans yesterday being very careful as usual and after leaving, I kept my fingers/toes crossed. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
02-16-21 07:04 PM - Post#320852
I don't think there is a rational argument that college athletes aren't safer in season than out based on the protocols, testing and accountability required to stay on the field/floor. |
|
westcoast Senior Posts 302 |
02-16-21 07:37 PM - Post#320853
If the entire student body or general population was tested as much as college athletes, how different would be the outcome between these different groups??? The more testing, the higher will be the COVID percentages. That line is nonsense - "the more testing, the higher will be the COVID percentages." That is clearly not true. Maybe you aren't aware of what's actually happening on Ivy campuses. At Princeton, ALL students are tested 2 times per week. There are strict 2-week quarantines on arrival. Rather than eating together in dining facilities, students eat "to-go" meals alone in their rooms. Classes are done online. Gatherings in rooms are forbidden. Most singing/dancing/comedy groups are not allowed. This all helps keep the positive case numbers so low. Even with the lack of Ivy Sports this year, there is a great deal of resentment on campuses that sports teams are now allowed to get together to practice while other organizations are not allowed to meet. The NARPs (Non-Athletic Regular People) are making a lot of noise about what they see as the special treatment of athletes. |
|
SRP Postdoc Posts 4911 |
02-16-21 08:34 PM - Post#320854
At this point, it indeed seems absurd to try to defend the "sky would fall if the Ivies had sports" point of view. Even without a bubble. Zero cases is not a reasonable objective here, and the manifest feasibility of holding the NCAA season without the sky falling ought to be sufficient proof. The athletes are a relatively low-risk group, it is easier to monitor and control their social distancing when they are more subject to team routines, the athletes not the fans are the primary victims of the cancelation, etc., all points made redundantly in the thread above. Now it looks like donors are getting ticked off by the smug non-responsiveness of the Ivy leadership to common sense. What are they going to do if the pandemic continues into next year? Time to walk away from a mistake, rather than entrenching themselves. |
|
Go Green PhD Student Posts 1149 |
02-18-21 02:13 PM - Post#320939
No spring conference competition. https://ivyleague.com/news/2021/2/18/genera l-ivy-l... |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
02-18-21 02:35 PM - Post#320942
Council of Presidents Joint Statement - As campus and community leaders, we believe that our public health responsibilities and educational principles preclude us from sponsoring Ivy League athletics competition this spring. The public health measures now in effect at all Ivy League universities have been carefully designed to support our teaching and research missions while keeping our students, faculty, staff and neighboring communities safe. These policies include restrictions on travel, limitations on campus visitors, and other pandemic related regulations that are not compatible with the Ivy League’s usual competition schedule. In the Ivy League, these measures must apply equally to our athletics programs along with other academic and co-curricular activities. We know that this news will come as a disappointment to many in our community. We regret the many sacrifices that have been required in response to the pandemic, and we appreciate the resilience of our student-athletes, coaches and staff in the face of adversity during this difficult and unusual year. While we would like nothing better than to deliver a complete season of competition, these are the necessary decisions for the Ivy League in the face of the health concerns posed by the ongoing and dangerous pandemic. We will continue to monitor the situation as we move forward so that our universities can determine whether Ivy League principles and evolving health conditions might allow for limited, local competition later this spring. - |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
02-18-21 02:37 PM - Post#320943
(additional info from the release) Newly adopted parameters for practice and competition: The Ivy League will not be conducting a conference spring season Due to the ongoing impacts of the pandemic, and in order to maintain compliance both with campus travel, visitor and gathering policies and also with the state guidelines governing each institution, the Ivy League will not conduct conference seasons or conference postseason events in any spring sports. Continuance of Ivy League athletics activities phases Member institutions will continue with the league-wide phases for athletics activities already in place on all Ivy League campuses, subject to individual institutional policies. These phases govern athletics activities including training, practices, and other team and individual activities. While the league’s goal is to work toward local competition in Phase IV, it is currently not permitted on any Ivy League campus. Potential opportunities for local spring competition If public health conditions substantially improve and if permitted by an institution, local non-conference competition may be allowed to occur this spring. These competitions will be subject to league stipulations and must remain consistent with institutional policies for comparable co-curricular activities, including applicable travel restrictions for on-campus students and university visitor policies. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
02-18-21 02:40 PM - Post#320944
Student-Athlete FAQ Page https://ivyleague.com/documents/2021/2/18// Spring_... |
|
Go Green PhD Student Posts 1149 |
02-18-21 02:49 PM - Post#320946
Potential opportunities for local spring competition If public health conditions substantially improve and if permitted by an institution, local non-conference competition may be allowed to occur this spring. Those Dartmouth versus UNH/UVM/Plymouth State/Castleton/Middlebur y/Colby-Sawyer games should be fun.... |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
03-02-21 01:04 PM - Post#321306
Article from ESPN covers Harvard's Forbes, Mike Martin and James Jones and what they are doing while everyone else has a season: https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketba ll/story... |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
03-02-21 10:40 PM - Post#321310
As college basketball is heading towards March Madness, approximately 90% of 400+ games were played over the past 7 days which I believe is the highest weekly percentage of the season. Of the games cancelled, 1 of the teams were ready to play from a health perspective with the rarest of exceptions. It will be interesting to see how NCAA officials manage Indianapolis. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
03-09-21 01:09 PM - Post#321657
Including today, approximately 250 games were scheduled to be played over the past 6 days with 10 cancellations, 95% plus games were played. There were a fair number of BB and medical "so called experts" who had the season being cancelled several months ago. Where are they now as March Madness is around the corner As to Spring sports being cancelled, it basically says it all as to the mindset of the IL Presidents. Sports are a side bar in their view of the world which is ok I guess but just simply be honest about it. The only good news for some of us is that IvyMadness is off the board. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
03-11-21 02:24 PM - Post#321805
Duke out of ACC tournament due to positive Covid test and announces its season is over. https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketba ll/story... |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
03-11-21 03:06 PM - Post#321807
I fear more of this at the NCAA Tournament with fans present. P38, this was one of the risks associated with a bubble concept. Entire season would come down to a single short time period. Worse than the risk of injury which only sidelines a player, a positive COVID case disqualifies entire team(s). In this instance, because the ACC tournament is single elimination, the fact that BC and Notre Dame would now have to quarantine is of little consequence. If this was a 'round robin' extended schedule, three teams would now be quarantined for at least 5 to 7 days, assuming no further positive tests. Thus, only one positive case would 'burst' that sort of bubble. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
03-11-21 03:49 PM - Post#321808
I really don't want to go down this path again. All I'll say is that a bubble has been shown to work by both the NHL and NBA. If you hermetically seal the bubble, how does a case get in? But they never seriously considered it, so it just doesn't matter |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
03-11-21 04:11 PM - Post#321809
Duke out of ACC tournament due to positive Covid test and announces its season is over. https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketba ll/story... It's always nice to see Duke eliminated. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
03-11-21 05:05 PM - Post#321810
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketba ll/story... The biggest difference between the ACC and NCAA tournament protocols is that the NCAA requires seven consecutive negative tests before traveling to Indianapolis. As a result, the expectation is that this type of situation won't happen during the NCAA tournament. Moreover, Duke was traveling back and forth from Durham because the school thought it was safer than staying in Greensboro; that also won't happen during the NCAA tournament. -- Jeff Borzello Louisville released a statement saying it tested all of its Tier 1 individuals following Wednesday night's game and all results came back negative. "We are confident through the ACC's use of Kinexon digital proximity technology that we will not experience any contact tracing that would affect our team," the school said. Boston College hasn't released an official statement yet, although I'm told it's in the process of gathering more information. -- Jeff Borzello |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
03-11-21 11:37 PM - Post#321837
Am I correct in understanding that Louisville testing it's players (and others) the very next day after exposure to an infected individual is worthless. CDC recommends testing 5 to 7 days after exposure due to the incubation period. Were other teams exposed (bench, locker rooms, proximity)? |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
03-11-21 11:53 PM - Post#321839
I believe you are correct - a test last night or today would be too early to tell. NC A&T, the favorite in the MEAC, had to withdraw due to a positive test. Since their first game was scheduled for Friday, no other team needs to quarantine their players. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
03-12-21 12:12 PM - Post#321851
Virginia has withdrawn from the ACC Tournament due to a positive test within the program. https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketba ll/story... - While Duke athletic director Kevin White announced Thursday that the Blue Devils' season was over, that's not necessarily the case for Virginia. To play in the NCAA tournament, a team needs to show seven consecutive negative daily tests before arriving in Indianapolis, then undergo daily testing while inside the controlled environment there. Dan Gavitt, NCAA senior vice president of men's basketball, has also said that a team just needs five healthy players to play in an NCAA tournament game. If Virginia doesn't have a widespread COVID-19 outbreak and the rest of the team continues to test negative, the Cavaliers should be eligible to play in the NCAA tournament. - |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
03-12-21 12:21 PM - Post#321852
Dan Gavitt, NCAA senior vice president of men's basketball, has also said that a team just needs five healthy players to play in an NCAA tournament game. - Just imagine a top seeded team playing such a game. The underdog will be undoubtedly be playing a physical, high contact game non-stop, rotating its players in and out, targeting one specific player at a time on the opposition. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
03-12-21 02:43 PM - Post#321860
Kansas has a player who tested positive and the Jayhawks have been removed from the Big 12 Tournament. https://twitter.com/MattNorlander/status/ 137044309... CBS Sports was told that the person who tested positive played against Oklahoma last night. Also, the network was told it remains to-be-determined whether or not this will impact Kansas’ availability and eligibility for the NCAA Tournament. Duke, UVA and Kansas out due to covid in the matter of 24 hours. March Madness indeed .... |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
03-12-21 02:46 PM - Post#321861
https://twitter.com/DanaONeilWriter/statu s/1370436... Dana O'NeilFace with medical mask @DanaONeilWriter Source says Virginia needs to work through county protocols on contact tracing and quarantining to get the Ok to go to the NCAAT. Hopeful but obviously not certain it can participate. 1:09 PM · Mar 12, 2021 |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
03-12-21 03:07 PM - Post#321864
This is all troubling but, frankly, not surprising. You let down your guard for one second against this virus and it's like Paul Westhead's LMU running roughshod over you. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
03-12-21 03:18 PM - Post#321866
Speaking of which: https://big12sports.com/news/2021/3/12/mens-b asket... |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
03-12-21 03:29 PM - Post#321868
Too many folks seem to think this is "all over". It's not. I wish it were. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
03-12-21 03:30 PM - Post#321869
My wife got Pfizer Shot No 1 today. We'll see when I can get it |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
03-12-21 03:36 PM - Post#321870
I'm getting Pfizer #2 in a week and half. My in-laws, who are completely vaccinated, want to see us over Pesach. By then, I still won't have been 2 weeks clear of the second shot and in any event our 3 kids are unvaccinated (with one having experienced some off and on asthma during his childhood). Mrs. Nation is already in the clear. But I insisted that this be an outdoor gathering, social distanced with masks. Hopefully the weather will cooperate and we can hang out on our patio. We've only seen each other once in person in the last 14 months (outdoors only, socially distanced, with masks at their place). But we have to keep this up a bit longer. I know of too many folks who are going to be travelling and doing things over Passover that they probably still shouldn't be doing at this point. The tug of family is very real. I get it. Hopefully this is the last Passover where it will just be the 5 Nations for Seder. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-12-21 04:09 PM - Post#321875
you're being much too cautious PN. If your children are around all vaccinated folks, it's time to take off the masks. Everyone needs it. i mean you could arguably do this inside (I had my first dinner with the kids and grandma maskless last month and it was heaven.) but surely they can be maskless outside. Unless there's a PN family tradition where you spit into each other's mouths or something. And if you think i'm trying to tell you how to raise your kids, you do you. But this explains much about your unreasonably cautiousness towards ivy athletes. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
03-12-21 04:24 PM - Post#321876
Just following the new CDC guidelines. Sorry if that strikes you as being too draconian:
If you’ve been fully vaccinated: You can gather indoors with fully vaccinated people without wearing a mask. You can gather indoors with unvaccinated people from one other household (for example, visiting with relatives who all live together) without masks, unless any of those people or anyone they live with has an increased risk for severe illness from COVID-19. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov /need-ext... My boychick with asthma in his history falls into that larger category. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-12-21 04:26 PM - Post#321877
the cdc also tells you not to eat your steak medium and your eggs runny. you're being too cautious. i mean jeez, there have been 200 deaths of covid in kids under 18. You're in more danger driving the car TO the outdoor gathering with vaccinated adults |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
03-12-21 04:27 PM - Post#321878
I think it is burgers--steak is safe inside |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-12-21 04:30 PM - Post#321880
i mean jesus christ what does follow the science even mean if we've got folks just as unreasonable about what we do post vaccination as the idiots walking around maskless in supermarkets. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
03-12-21 04:31 PM - Post#321881
I think there's a lot more at stake (not steak) when we're doing about COVID. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
03-12-21 04:33 PM - Post#321882
i mean jesus christ what does follow the science even mean if we've got folks just as unreasonable about what we do post vaccination as the idiots walking around maskless in supermarkets. Let me tell you something--once I am two weeks clear of the vaccine in the early part of April, I will more than happily start to run errands at the supermarket which Mrs. Nation has banned me from doing for the past year. Double masked, of course. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
03-12-21 04:33 PM - Post#321883
Respectfully, while I tend to agree with you that the risks, ESPECIALLY OUTDOORS, are below tiny, there's a huge difference between someone who may be overcautious and keeps away from people and someone who is a jerk and refuses to wear a mask and spews spray on others in a supermarket. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-12-21 05:07 PM - Post#321884
Respectfully, while I tend to agree with you that the risks, ESPECIALLY OUTDOORS, are below tiny, there's a huge difference between someone who may be overcautious and keeps away from people and someone who is a jerk and refuses to wear a mask and spews spray on others in a supermarket. no doubt you're right but a) I know a lot more of the penn nation unreasonables. And b) those people are starting to make it unappealing to folks to get vaccinated. Hey, once you're vaccinated, you still gotta be outside masked or wearing 2 masks to the grocery store. You most definitely don't. The vaccine is wonderful. I think I let everyone know that I participated in the Pfizer trial (you're all welcome) and we need to get back to normal asap. that means hugging grandma if she's vaccinated. The risk to children is de minimus. We weren't doing all this to protect our kids, we were doing it to protect mom and dad. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
03-12-21 05:15 PM - Post#321885
I think I’ve mentioned this before but I’m a type I diabetic. I am still going to personally be more careful than the average American out there. I would certainly not insist on double masking for most others, including certain other family members. You’re really going to be more upset with me than the state of Texas (“voluntary complianceâ€, by the way, at those Rangers games)? I intend to be much more “out there†this year. That said, I think I’ll wait until 2022 before getting on an airplane. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-12-21 05:17 PM - Post#321887
yes because i can't even believe how dumb the masks while everyone's vaccinated outside. it's so bad man. it's sooooo bad. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-12-21 05:19 PM - Post#321889
also, i learned to have a little more humility about all the bad decisions by our southern brothers since like october when their imminent demise, which all blue staters have been predicting, didn't happen. Florida should be having TERRIBLE outcomes relative to like southern california. And they're not. Would i have waited another month? Yes, but while this will cost lives, it won't be noticeable to the general public. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
03-12-21 05:19 PM - Post#321890
This precise point was made in some NPR interview I heard this week. The protocols up until now were to protect the most vulnerable (the elderly); now they are evolving to protect those still most at risk, since larger and larger proportions of seniors have now been vaccinated.
Respectfully, while I tend to agree with you that the risks, ESPECIALLY OUTDOORS, are below tiny, there's a huge difference between someone who may be overcautious and keeps away from people and someone who is a jerk and refuses to wear a mask and spews spray on others in a supermarket. no doubt you're right but a) I know a lot more of the penn nation unreasonables. And b) those people are starting to make it unappealing to folks to get vaccinated. Hey, once you're vaccinated, you still gotta be outside masked or wearing 2 masks to the grocery store. You most definitely don't. The vaccine is wonderful. I think I let everyone know that I participated in the Pfizer trial (you're all welcome) and we need to get back to normal asap. that means hugging grandma if she's vaccinated. The risk to children is de minimus. We weren't doing all this to protect our kids, we were doing it to protect mom and dad. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-12-21 05:35 PM - Post#321892
nah, just gather outside maskless, you'll serve your kids better. there's so little danger, you're scarring them. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-12-21 05:36 PM - Post#321893
i can't believe we allowed you to guide any of the conversation about whether Ivy League young adults could play sports. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
03-12-21 05:44 PM - Post#321894
I don't think you know much about me at all. I have sent all 3 of my kids, all in high school, to school each and every day this year. Next month, my 2 senior boys are scheduled to travel to Israel with their 12th class for an 8 week trip. I have full confidence in the measures taken by the school, which are considerable, to minimize the opportunities for contracting COVID (and should a case occur, to make sure that it does not spread beyond that single case). |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-12-21 06:03 PM - Post#321896
good, then you know you can go maskless outdoors. seriously, good on you about the 8 weeks in israel. but if you're kids can survive masked on a plane for 8 hours they can survive out of masks outdoors. if we had guided everyone that outdoors is completely fine (and i'm talking where not everyone is vaccinated, your family is ridiculously safe), we'd have a lot better compliance. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
03-14-21 04:03 PM - Post#321984
Seriously, Jeff2SF. We all make choices and PN's are protecting family health. He has disclosed medical conditions which he shouldn't have felt compelled to do by your ridicule and shaming and has made reasonable choices for himself. Shut the ____ up. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-14-21 04:55 PM - Post#321986
No. He’s got the wrong info. I’m correcting him. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-14-21 04:56 PM - Post#321987
I’m over hygiene theater. Being outside is wonderful and if weather permits it, it solves everything. Lose the masks |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
03-14-21 04:59 PM - Post#321988
I hiked in the Pine Barrens today. Carried my mask with me and put it on any time people came by. Just as a polite thing to do. Being polite is a good thing. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
03-14-21 05:02 PM - Post#321989
I’m over hygiene theater. Being outside is wonderful and if weather permits it, it solves everything. Lose the masks I take walks twice a day and have been for the past year. I have my mask on since there are inevitably numerous other walkers and bikers I encounter. Some are masked but others are not. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-14-21 05:03 PM - Post#321990
Mrs. Nation is already in the clear. But I insisted that this be an outdoor gathering, social distanced with masks. Hopefully the weather will cooperate and we can hang out on our patio. my objection is this sort of hygiene theater. Why not just say "I'm seeing my parents". What's the virtue signaling here. What you do behind closed doors is your biz. but it's stupid. and look, part of this is my own "hangup": Having said that, in the two months of the quarantine, we were super zealous about quarantining and beat our parents over the head with that leading to much consternation and grumbling and eventually rebellion as our parents saw their other grandchildren and hugged them and all that. We argued a couple times with my in-laws about it and my parents knew we were just dead set on it but were very sad. Then my dad went into the hospital in May for trouble with his heart and never came out of it, dying months later. I regret not letting my kids hang out with him more in the month before he went in and not hanging out with my mom during the first month he was in when my mom was breaking down and needed her grandkids. now that she's vaccinated, we're maskless all the time. It's wonderful. she's so much happier. kids don't die of this. let's get on with it. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-14-21 05:04 PM - Post#321991
and you would have been fine if you didn't wear a mask. |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
03-14-21 05:10 PM - Post#321992
Maybe, or maybe not. Masks protect others - from you |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-14-21 05:14 PM - Post#321993
Guys please show me all the studies about people acquiring covid from walking by each other outdoors. Or hanging out vaccinated |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
03-14-21 05:22 PM - Post#321994
Show me your research that shows that this isn't spread by airborne transmission from person to person. Just stop this. It's fine to have opinions on the coronavirus and the right behavior. It's less fine to preach about it on a basketball newsgroup - maybe if you were an epidemiologist we would care what you think. It just crossed a line to ridicule someone making serious health decisions for themselves. Please stop defending yourself and realize that this is bully behavior, even if on-line. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
03-14-21 05:23 PM - Post#321995
No one gets it from walking by each other outside. But as a matter of social manners, it's not hard to have it ready to use if you're passing on the street. In the woods, you can simply take a wide berth. But as you see, some people react in a manner that is based on fear. So why scare them? |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
03-14-21 05:28 PM - Post#321996
You have it backwards. Prove that there is no risk. 30M infected and <500k dead here. Many more suffering other effects. CDC and many states require masks unless you know you can remain 6 feet distanced. Where’s the proof that this isn’t a reasonable precaution. Truly sorry about your loss. Speechless that it doesn’t resonate in a way that makes you more considerate of others. Watching Italy go into lockdown again. Really don’t want us to go there again. 60,000 new cases and 1,500 deaths each day should indicate that we’re not out of this. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-14-21 05:37 PM - Post#321998
Oh I bring my mask. I even double up at the supermarket because of fit concerns. But we can’t have hygiene theater. And outdoors is fine |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
03-14-21 05:51 PM - Post#321999
Duke just ordered all students to shelter in place for a week |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
03-14-21 06:12 PM - Post#322002
Seriously, he can have hygiene theater if he wants and you can just button up about it. He's talking about his own home, his own family, and his family's health. He didn't tell you what to do, and he's already explained enough reasons to warrant extra caution. You crossed a line. Just apologize for acting like a cockroach. It isn't that hard to do. Then we can all go back to enjoying basketball related topics. |
|
Streamers Professor Posts 8257
|
03-14-21 07:26 PM - Post#322007
Duke just ordered all students to shelter in place for a week Blaming Greek rush and recruiting events for their social club dorms. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
03-14-21 07:34 PM - Post#322008
I didn't ask for anyone to apologize nor is it needed--at least, not for me. Appreciate the thoughts of those who have commented. |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
03-14-21 08:12 PM - Post#322015
A lot of crossed responses here, so I'm not quite sure who has been responding to whom. I don't mean to attack anyone, just very very tired of defending the use of masks. As a coop president, I had to do so for over 150 individuals, some of whom refused to wear a mask because they personally felt they didn't need it. To me, that is not why you wear the mask. Now, I'm handling this for an office setting. The result was four COVID cases in a month's time, each shutting the office down. My wife teaches pre-school, which got shut down when a parent lied and sent a 3 year old despite her father and a sibling having COVID. My son advises a large state on testing and vaccines, so I stay on top of the latest science and studies. That said, I push back against those who see masks as not necessary. Certainly, it is acknowledged that six feeet + outdoors can suffice, as long as you are prepared to mask up as a courtesy if someone comes near. It doesn't seem acceptable though to claim that others should avoid you. That's not fair. I truly fear an NCAA tournament nightmare as fans attend. This is not a bubble, just less travel. Just got finished watching 60 Minutes where a virologish explained that our vaccines may not work against some variants and showed why. Please everyone, let's not jump before we know. I hope for the best for everyone and to an awesome 2021. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-14-21 08:19 PM - Post#322017
There will be absolutely no apologies forthcoming. Let’s be real. Unless on wants to apologize to his family for undue burdens. Or his wife. The outdoors is safe. I’m not an anti masker. I’m not against shutdowns. You won’t find me eating at a restaurant indoors. Texas opened up too quick. Etc. A vaccinated family does not need to wear masks OUTDOORS. That’s it. That’s the tweet |
|
OldBig5 Masters Student Posts 639 |
03-14-21 08:49 PM - Post#322022
https://www.bbc.com/news/explainers-55680 305 It's not impossible to catch it outdoors. Very low risk. However if you're kid is playing at the playground without a mask and someone sneezes in his or her face they have a decent chance of catching something. As far as those being vaccinated not wearing masks I don't think we have the research yet to know if those vaccinated are still getting the virus and can spread it. Some of what I have read seem promising that they are not. However in the interim why not just wear it around others even when outdoors. No one knows you were vaccinated. Why cause them unnecessary stress? I carry my mask outdoors and wear it when people go by. It may be an overreaction but so be it. I will also probably keep wearing a mask in stores and such even after the virus is largely gone. Seems a great way to avoid the cold and flu. |
|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
03-14-21 08:56 PM - Post#322023
Jeff, Sorry to hear of your Dad’s passing. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-14-21 09:17 PM - Post#322029
thanks, penn alum class of 72. look guys, you sound like you only have arguments for covid deniers or anti maskers. that ain't me. I believe in science, but I don't believe in a riskless world. We can't make all our decisions based on 99.95% statistical significance. We don't "know" that the vaccine reduces transmission. but we do in fact "know" that vaccine reduces transmission. I can't promise you a world without risk. But we never lived in one from the beginning. and i didn't put my body on the line in the vaccine trial just so PN's kids bubbe can't hug her grandkids when vaccinated maskless. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
03-14-21 09:58 PM - Post#322030
My issue is ridiculing someone else's health choices. The problem is that you are telling someone else what risks should be acceptable to them. I feel fine being outdoors with other people, unmasked at a distance. I feel it is very low risk. But I don't type message after message harassing other people who won't. I read that and think WTF. Especially when people on this board may have lost loved ones and/or have their own personal health considerations. Jeff2SF, I don't give a ____ what you think about anyone's choices. Such a _____. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
03-14-21 10:11 PM - Post#322031
What is the matter with you? He's already mentioned that he has health considerations. He's mentioned that his wife is as cautious as he is. You've talked about hygiene theater, being much too cautious, and that he should apologize to his family even since these disclosures. Just shut it.
There will be absolutely no apologies forthcoming. Let’s be real. Unless on wants to apologize to his family for undue burdens. Or his wife. The outdoors is safe. I’m not an anti masker. I’m not against shutdowns. You won’t find me eating at a restaurant indoors. Texas opened up too quick. Etc. A vaccinated family does not need to wear masks OUTDOORS. That’s it. That’s the tweet |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-14-21 11:09 PM - Post#322032
just stop bud. there's no basketball to talk about. it's been a long pandemic, i'm going to do my thing (call people out on hygiene theater). |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
03-15-21 06:04 AM - Post#322033
You wouldn't entertain a bit of hygiene theater to help your boy, parents, or self (each with elevated risks, so your made up statistics may not apply) feel safe? Fine for you then. Your choice. A board poster getting their family together for the first time in a while is the heartwarming moment you decide to lecture people on hygiene theater? If someone built a freakin' plastic bubble for everyone, you are still out of line. I'm sorry to hear about your dad (only just saw that on re-reading some posts), but *possibly* someone on this board could have lost a loved one someone not having sufficient hygiene theater? I for one know a family (Penn alums, no less) that lost a previously healthy grandparent due to a holiday extended family get together and the spread of covid. Trust me, the amount of grief, anger, blame, guilt and broken feelings are unimaginable. I really don't know how or if the family will ever heal. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-15-21 02:55 PM - Post#322068
you're just missing the point, man. You're also too focused on the risks you see vs. the risks you don't see. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
03-15-21 04:58 PM - Post#322088
See, that's where you're wrong. I am not even basing my comments on the risks at all. I am not lecturing anyone about wearing a mask or not. That's what you're doing. I'm judging the fact that you're badgering other people's choices about their health. You made a giant production of why you're right before I got started here. You are not in their shoes and their decisions are their own and don't endanger you in any way. That is the WTF part of this. I already said that I meet people outdoors and without masks with a bit of space. Comments like Hygiene theater absolutely tick me off. I need to call this out. PF clearly doesn't need my defense and is handling it fine, but what if it were someone else struggling? Many people are in these times. Just because you are anonymous on a board doesn't mean you should force this jackery on everyone. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-15-21 05:07 PM - Post#322090
you're not going to win this bud. There's nothing to talk about basketball wise and I haven't paid attention to a basketball thought of yours in years so what do you wanna do? You talked about the risks to the older people, so that's what I commented on. I didn't risk my life with the vaccine trial just to see grandma have to meet in a mask outdoors. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
03-15-21 06:45 PM - Post#322095
Your choices covid-wise are fine by me. Short of you giving covid to others, I really don't care. You simply could have said you had a different experience and reasons for regretting your own mask choices with your family. I would have no issues with that. Trying to impose your will and point of view on people whose circumstances you had no idea about is BS. You can keep thinking you're right by being a brick. I'm still calling this out. ______. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-15-21 06:47 PM - Post#322096
no, they do not affect the math of a child with moderate asthma outside around vaccinated adults. It does not, at all. it's stupid. you keep calling attention to penn nation's dumb decision by trying to defend it. just let it go. i will keep coming at you. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
03-15-21 07:01 PM - Post#322097
What does this say about you? |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
03-15-21 07:43 PM - Post#322101
There will be absolutely no apologies forthcoming. Let’s be real. Unless on wants to apologize to his family for undue burdens. Or his wife. The outdoors is safe. I’m not an anti masker. I’m not against shutdowns. You won’t find me eating at a restaurant indoors. Texas opened up too quick. Etc. A vaccinated family does not need to wear masks OUTDOORS. That’s it. That’s the tweet Hmmm. I may be mistaken but wasn't the superspreader event in DC (when Amy Coney Barret was confirmed) all outside? No one wore masks. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-16-21 10:50 AM - Post#322118
there was a large indoor component despite being called "the rose garden event". https://www.vox.com/coronavirus-covid19/2 1499923/t... but also to be clear, I'm not advocating anyone hang out in seats that close, let alone maskless, for an hour. seems unlikely that many of us are being invited to those sorts of ceremonies on the reg though. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
03-16-21 12:42 PM - Post#322121
To be clear, you were advocating that higher risk category people hang out and hug since being outdoors and partially vaccinated is perfectly safe. Not only that, you called wearing masks outdoors in those circumstances "dumb" and hygiene theater. I'm not arguing whether about the risk of the health issues. I'm just arguing that you were an over-the-line troll, and you could keep it to yourself or let it rest after sharing your opinion. And now I'm arguing you are revisionist. As a side note, Mike Lee was bear hugging, sweating, and breathing directly on every person at that ceremony. He has not been named, but he seems like a higher probability link in the chain of that event.
there was a large indoor component despite being called "the rose garden event". https://www.vox.com/coronavirus-covid19/2 1499923/t... but also to be clear, I'm not advocating anyone hang out in seats that close, let alone maskless, for an hour. seems unlikely that many of us are being invited to those sorts of ceremonies on the reg though. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-16-21 01:08 PM - Post#322124
yes i was advocating that vaccinated people (3 adults in the clear, one that would be one week post shot) could hang out outside with their kids. Any non-genius knows that's perfectly safe. stop prolonging this. I'm right. I won't yield. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
03-16-21 01:27 PM - Post#322125
Remember, I didn't say you were right or wrong. I only said you were being a troll. Were you born right or did you become that way? How did you become so blessed? |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-16-21 01:52 PM - Post#322126
you keep saying that about the troll thing and then you start talking about the merits of what i'm advocating and talking about covid. So like i said, every single time you write, I'm going to reply. That's happening. If you're cool with it, I'm fine with it. I'm happy to highlight PN's foolhardy hygiene theater. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
03-16-21 03:04 PM - Post#322132
There are some items where I'm not comfortable enough with a 95% confidence level, nor are you or anyone else. There are even some items where even a 99% confidence level doesn't do it, either for me, you or anyone else. For me, coming down with COVID is something I'd rather not risk, thank you very much, given my comorbidities. For others like you, you can afford to have some leeway. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
03-16-21 03:17 PM - Post#322134
You're the best troll we've had since BRF, although the difference is that he was actually right about something. Let's carry on - it's been your general approach anyway on all topics. Good for you. Are you a litigator in life or else someone who never gets to have the lost word in an argument except on this board?
you keep saying that about the troll thing and then you start talking about the merits of what i'm advocating and talking about covid. So like i said, every single time you write, I'm going to reply. That's happening. If you're cool with it, I'm fine with it. I'm happy to highlight PN's foolhardy hygiene theater. |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
03-16-21 03:37 PM - Post#322135
On 60 Minutes this past Sunday, a medical expert showed why current vaccines may not provide protection against variants. Since variants appear to be never ending, I personally will be wearing masks outside for a while. So are >90% of those I pass in NYC every day. Fortunately, current vaccines appear to provide good protection against the most common variant (B.1.1.7). Very important as this variant is expected to become the most common form of the virus and has a 64% higher fatality rate then the common COVID-19. For those eschewing the vaccine, they do so despite being warned of higher contagiousness and fatality rates. It's discoveries like these that lead me to fear and respect that which we don't yet know. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-16-21 03:46 PM - Post#322136
You're the best troll we've had since BRF, although the difference is that he was actually right about something. that's both hurtful and untrue. |
|
OldBig5 Masters Student Posts 639 |
03-16-21 03:47 PM - Post#322137
You're the best troll we've had since BRF, although the difference is that he was actually right about something. that's both hurtful and untrue. Internet theatre. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-16-21 03:48 PM - Post#322138
On 60 Minutes this past Sunday, a medical expert showed why current vaccines may not provide protection against variants. Since variants appear to be never ending, I personally will be wearing masks outside for a while. So are >90% of those I pass in NYC every day. Fortunately, current vaccines appear to provide good protection against the most common variant (B.1.1.7). Very important as this variant is expected to become the most common form of the virus and has a 64% higher fatality rate then the common COVID-19. For those eschewing the vaccine, they do so despite being warned of higher contagiousness and fatality rates. It's discoveries like these that lead me to fear and respect that which we don't yet know. serious question, have you considered that they are just trying to scare you? we don't know what variants are coming along, but the thing is, you never had 100% safety in anything you've ever done. i fear COVID... unvaccinated. I fear COVID... indoors. But otherwise, bud, you have to live your life. I can't give you 100% assurances about anything. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-16-21 03:49 PM - Post#322139
There are some items where I'm not comfortable enough with a 95% confidence level, nor are you or anyone else. There are even some items where even a 99% confidence level doesn't do it, either for me, you or anyone else. For me, coming down with COVID is something I'd rather not risk, thank you very much, given my comorbidities. For others like you, you can afford to have some leeway. it's not 99%. the chance that you could get covid from three vaccinated adults outdoors when you already have had your 2nd shot for at least a few days is vanishingly small. it's certainly much smaller than you're kids getting it on a crowded plane for 8 hours. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
03-16-21 03:55 PM - Post#322141
2 of those vaccinated adults will have flown in from Florida only a few days earlier, with no testing requirements whatsoever for anyone on the flight. Who knows what they might be transmitting to others when in our neck of the woods. On the international flight for my boys, they and their classmates will all be tested twice, once 12 days before and once 2 days before. If they don't pass both tests they will not be allowed on the flight, period. |
|
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2692 |
03-16-21 03:58 PM - Post#322142
No, I don't think that leading scientists and medical experts are "trying to scare" me. I do think that they are trying to inform me. By the way, the flu vaccine doesn't work against all variants either. Let me guess, do you think that >97% of scientists are merely "trying to scare" me about climate change? I believe I already know the answer to that. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-16-21 04:00 PM - Post#322143
No, not at all. climate change is real and needs to be addressed. You all really struggle with a person who isn't an anti-masker covid denier. It's very tough to put me in the box you want to. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-16-21 04:04 PM - Post#322144
that risk (that unvaccinated people could test neg and either contract later and/or already have it and false neg) is much higher. they aren't transmitting anything to you. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
03-16-21 04:59 PM - Post#322152
As much as the Penn fans wanted to deny it, he was right when he predicted the rise of Cornell. We called him a troll though he was seeing a few years ahead of us. You? The Darnell Foreman team? Rob Belcore? Many long treatises from you about those topic. Did you receive lots of rewards and compliments when you were younger or very few? Just curious.
You're the best troll we've had since BRF, although the difference is that he was actually right about something. that's both hurtful and untrue. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
03-16-21 05:01 PM - Post#322153
they aren't transmitting anything to you. It's not clear what the risk is on this point, at least to date. Reduced risk, yes, but hardly zero: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/03/health/cor onavi... |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-16-21 05:05 PM - Post#322155
As much as the Penn fans wanted to deny it, he was right when he predicted the rise of Cornell. We called him a troll though he was seeing a few years ahead of us. You? The Darnell Foreman team? Rob Belcore? Many long treatises from you about those topic. Did you receive lots of rewards and compliments when you were younger or very few? Just curious.
You're the best troll we've had since BRF, although the difference is that he was actually right about something. that's both hurtful and untrue. if you predict something every year for 10 years, you have a chance of being right, yes. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
03-16-21 05:44 PM - Post#322159
BRF always had to have the last word too, so now I'm finally ready to hand the mic to you to close. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-16-21 06:54 PM - Post#322170
i told you, you would not win. Much like Cornell most of the time. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
03-16-21 08:28 PM - Post#322182
I only care if people put others at more risk. I could care less about people taking too many precautions - whatever that means. If people want to wear masks when the number of cases is zero, that’s fine by me. Our biggest problem over the past year has not been people taking this virus too seriously. |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-16-21 10:03 PM - Post#322186
If pn didn’t tell me he was doing it, I wouldn’t have cared. I believe hygiene theatre (look at me, I’m wearing a mask outside amongst vaccinated folks because I’m taking this very seriously), contributes to confusion and vax hesitancy. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
03-17-21 02:18 AM - Post#322187
OMG. Please not again. I gave you the last word. It could all be over. You and mrjames could have argued about statistics. Just not this. Please. I don't know a single one of you, but I can be very confident that wearing masks in the privacy of his own home hasn't caused PN's almost vaccinated family any vax hesitancy. What they do at home isn't even public theater. It's private. It's just apparently a platform for a windbag to keep blowing about nothing. Can we trade jeff2SF for BRF? No salary, no other players, no other draft picks. Just player for player. No brainer. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
03-17-21 02:21 AM - Post#322188
OMG. Please not again. I gave you the last word. It could all be over. You and mrjames could have argued about statistics. Just not this. Please. I don't know a single one of you, but I can be very confident that wearing masks in the privacy of his own home hasn't caused PN's almost vaccinated family any vax hesitancy. What they do at home isn't even public theater. It's private. It's just apparently a platform for a windbag to keep blowing about nothing. Can we trade jeff2SF for BRF? No salary, no other players, no other draft picks. Just player for player. No brainer. TigerFan, where are you? |
|
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466 |
03-17-21 07:52 AM - Post#322190
I love Mike. He's the smartest person on this board. He makes me think about things from a different perspective. You do know you don't have to click right? |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
03-17-21 01:54 PM - Post#322233
+1 on mrjames. -1 on PN. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
03-20-21 09:23 PM - Post#322336
NCAA Tournament won’t survive unscathed, as VCU bows out with positives. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21205 |
03-20-21 10:03 PM - Post#322337
Haven't they already ousted some referees as well? |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
03-20-21 10:09 PM - Post#322338
Correct. And it’s noteworthy (but will never be proven that this is definitely where VCU got it) that Roger Ayers was the confirmed positive that sent those refs home, and he did the A10 final. He had previously done the Duke game in the ACC Tourney before Duke got sent home with a positive. Again, no way to prove it, but it’s one possibility of what happened. |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
03-20-21 11:34 PM - Post#322339
https://www.si.com/college/2021/03/21/vc u-covid-ou... - There has been some rumination about a possible path that leads back to the Atlantic 10 tournament in Dayton—and maybe even a tangent to the Atlantic Coast Conference tournament in Greensboro. But nothing is remotely certain. Concerns were raised by some sources about the Dayton Marriott as a source of VCU’s issues. That’s where the A-10 teams and officials were staying. One of the officials who worked the A-10 title game against St. Bonaventure was Roger Ayers, who since has tested positive and missed the men's NCAA tournament. Prior to coming to town to work that game, Ayers also worked two games in the ACC tourney—on Wednesday March 16 he did Louisville–Duke, and the Blue Devils tested out of the tourney the following day. On Thursday, March 17 he did Miami–Georgia Tech, and Yellow Jackets big man Moses Wright subsequently tested positive and missed the NCAA tourney. (Virginia also had to drop out of the ACC tourney due to COVID-19 issues, and the Cavaliers barely made it to Indy for this tourney. They arrived Friday afternoon, practiced once Saturday morning and played Saturday night—whereupon they were bounced by Ohio.) Dugas said “there’s no way to responsibly connect†all the basketball positive tests. “There’s too many other opportunities for infection,†he added. "So many other variables.†Nobody is saying Ayers—or a Duke player or whoever—is Patient Zero of this college basketball situation. However, some of the sport's officials privately are wondering about the NCAA’s handling of the refs who are and aren’t working this tournament. Five of them who had dinner with Ayers were removed from the tournament by contact tracing, but the two who worked that A-10 final with him have been allowed to officiate here: Bert Smith and Brent Hampton. Smith officiated the Loyola Chicago–Georgia Tech game Friday and USC–Drake Saturday; Hampton worked the North Texas–Purdue game Friday. - |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
03-20-21 11:37 PM - Post#322340
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/ne ws/... - Internally, VCU is wondering whether the site of the Atlantic 10 Tournament title game is responsible for the program finding itself out of the NCAA Tournament. Sources told CBS Sports that VCU, St. Bonaventure and the entire officiating crew for the event all stayed at the Dayton Marriott -- directly across the street from UD Arena, site of the title game in Dayton, Ohio. "I'm shocked St. Bonaventure doesn't have any positive cases," one source said. - - "The hotel was packed," a source told CBS Sports. "They had some sort of other tournament there. People not adhering to protocols, walking through the hotel and lobby without masks. There were people there that weren't from the A-10. The NCAA can control who's there, who's in the buildings, in the hotels, in the convention center. You have to have a credentials that have your picture on it that you wear around your neck everywhere you go. Everyone has to wear masks, four people to an elevators, no congregating in the lobbies. The NCAA has complete control of what's going on." This was not entirely the case at the Dayton Marriott. "There was some [other] event there," the source added. "There were kids, parents and people with differences of opinion [about COVID-19] and the hotel staff -- I witnessed the ladies at the check-in yelling to people walking through the lobby about putting their masks on." When reached for a statement about the matter at the A-10 Tournament title game, league spokesperson Drew Dickerson shared the following statement with CBS Sports: "A-10 teams were all in the same hotel. The teams all had dedicated floors separate from each other and separate from the public. The officials did as well. There was no mingling with teams; teams had dedicated meeting rooms that were separate from everyone else and separate from each other." - |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3056 |
03-21-21 12:02 AM - Post#322341
While it will be very difficult-to-impossible to figure out where the positive case originated, A10 Commissioner Bernadette McGlade will need to answer questions about the way the tournament was organized and the accommodations in Dayton. The entire A10 tournament was supposed to be at the Barclays Center in Brooklyn, but was relocated to Richmond and played at VCU and UR. The women's tournament was originally scheduled to be played at VCU. I believe the league decided to put the men's tournament first and the women's the following week. While all of the women's games were held at VCU, the men's held everything in Richmond and postponed the final game to the following week in Dayton. If the league had played the men's final on March 7, one day after the semifinals, everyone involved would have been at the same facility they were staying for the week. Instead, the two teams traveled across the country, stayed in a new hotel and brought in at least one ref who had been working in another league in another part of the country - all things that could increase the risk for something to go wrong. The NCAA will need to answer why they didn't have rooms ready for the 6 refs who arrived when they were told to do so on Sunday, why they didn't have people to keep the refs from going out to dinner after they arrived at the hotel and why they allowed the other 2 refs who worked the ACC game with Ayers to stay. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
03-22-21 08:15 AM - Post#322365
In fairness, the NCAAM and NCAAW women tournaments have been a success up to this point and time. On balance, the NCAA has received relatively good marks from the media other than how they handle the women's tournament but that is true every year. Needless to say, the IL could have participated if it wanted to participate. Reality is reality. |
|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
03-22-21 09:01 AM - Post#322368
In addition to the “what if†of just playing at all, it looks like it would have been a good year to potentially get a win or two. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
03-22-21 09:22 AM - Post#322375
Upsets always add a great dimension to the Tournament and a Atkinson/Swain lead team may have caused some damage. There is a reason why they call it the Big Dance and it is simply exciting. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
03-22-21 09:40 AM - Post#322378
Upsets always add a great dimension to the Tournament and a Atkinson/Swain lead team may have caused some damage. There is a reason why they call it the Big Dance and it is simply exciting. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
03-22-21 10:13 AM - Post#322383
Yale and Brown were certainly hurt most by the pandemic. Harvard would have been hard-pressed to take advantage of home court in 20-21, and Yale would have likely been in the slot of an Ohio, UCSB or North Texas with a competitive 5-12 or 4-13 game. At the same time, while there's no doubting the Ivy League could have held a season if it wanted to, it simply wouldn't have weathered the storm that other leagues chose to and would have shut its season down very soon after teams had to go into pause. Even if you disagree with the league's decision-making process, of which I've been pretty critical of late, I think we can all agree that, realistically, the league wouldn't have accepted a bunch of pauses to get to the finish line. So, everyone should agree that it was possible. Everyone should also agree that it's not what the Ivy League is and that's okay. |
|
bradley PhD Student Posts 1842 |
03-22-21 11:24 AM - Post#322388
I obviously disagree with the final decision of the IL Presidents. I do not have a clue about the process and really do not care. I agree with your thoughts that it is what it is and represents the attitude of IL Presidents. As fans, we can certainly object to their view of the world but it really will not change anything. The decision, unlike every other conference, says a lot as to where sports fit in the pecking order for IL Presidents and really is not a great surprise based on current IL policies relating to sports. There is nothing wrong in deciding not to be on the playing field of some of the great IL teams during the 60s and 70s and to a lesser extent, the 80s and 90s as times have changed. The notion that IL BB was going to become a two bid NCAAM Tournament league is a bit of a fantasy based on existing attitudes and policies of the IL. I remember that it was an arguing point for some as to the adoption of Ivy Madness. Two bids could happen on an isolated year but nothing is really going to change unless attitudes and policies change. It is fine to be a second tier mid-major conference at the end of the day and try to pull off an upset or two in the field of 64 or 32. Just simply send your best team to achieve this realistic goal. For some of us, what happened this year will effect future fandom -- for others, it will have no effect. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
03-22-21 12:31 PM - Post#322392
I understand the sentiment behind a lot of this, though I might nit at some of your final points. First, there are only 10 leagues that consistently get two or more bids. It would be awesome to get second bids in isolated years, and that would be a huge accomplishment. Getting a second bid consistently is even beyond where I see this league's ceiling being. Similarly, pulling off an upset or two in R64 and R32 (to make the Sweet 16) is pretty much the status of all leagues outside the Top 7 + Gonzaga. Finally, sending your best team is only helpful in really, really awful conferences. None of the Cinderellas in this year's Big Dance were their tourney's 1-seeds (ORU, Ohio, N. Texas, ACU) though some were the best KenPom team and the conf tourney "righted" a wrong there. The goal for the league should be to have one team every 2-3 years that is at large worthy where the tourney buys us an extra bid and maybe one year in every 5-10 where there are two clear at large caliber teams. We've had a lot of years of teams with resumes in the 50s and three in four (2011, 2012 and 2014) with a team in the top 50 in resume. There's still another step that needs to be taken. The 2016 class should have been that step, but those teams were decimated by injuries and other defections. If that's the new norm, that next step won't happen. If we get a relatively clean run at the level of recruiting we're currently doing, though, it could. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
03-24-21 02:22 PM - Post#322501
So, finally got to do a deep dive on the recruiting classes to bring my dataset up to date. Some interesting tidbits: - The 2018 class grades out as the best class league-wide for the Ivy in the recruiting ranking era, narrowly edging the 2016 class. That's a little surprising looking at the early production from that class, but here were the top players from that class (average rating and all-time rank in parens): 1. Jaelin (4.0, #2) 2. Kirkwood (3.8, #4) 3. Freedman (3.6, #7) 4. Ellis (3.2, #15) 5. Cotton (2.7, #33) 6. Kelly (2.6, #37) 7. Wang (2.5, #42) 8. Forbes (2.4, #50) 9. Samuels (2.4, #51) 10. Slajchert (1.8, #98) Now, Freedman and Wang were injured last year, and we kinda knew Kelly's and Cotton's recruiting ratings were more a vestige of where he stood earlier in the process, so some of this is the 2018 class not being quite as strong as it was rated, but some of it was injuries. All this is to say, though, that there's a talented senior class coming back. - It's getting a little harder to use recruiting rankings, as more and more of them seem to be focusing less and less outside the top, say, 300 or so. There are still some notable high ranking recruits in the 2019-2021 classes, but there just seems to be far less in the middle. For instance, from 2010 to 2018, we averaged, league-wide, just five recruits a year (and a max of 8 in any one year) that got zero mention at any recruiting site. In 2019, that ballooned to 12 and is sitting at 20 for 2020 and 19 for 2021. Now, there are a lot of reasons why I see that as a recruiting outlet change versus a talent change (anecdotally, our recruiting has gotten deeper as a league recently; static sites like NERR show us as having nabbed a similar number or more high ranking recruits there versus previous years, etc.). The good news is that it's not really a problem for judging recruits, however. That's because we generally only saw big differences in expected performance from the top echelon of recruits, which are still getting graded as usual. Beyond that level it became more of a numbers game, where just having more D1 recruits makes it more likely that some will hit. At any rate, here are the top 2019-2021 recruits: 1) Ledlum (3.4, #11) 2) MLL (3.4, #12) 3) Hemmings (3.2, #15) 4) Ajogbor (3.2, #15) 5) Tretout (3.0, #22) 6) Brayboy (2.8, #28) 7) Cowan (2.7, #33) 8) Simon (2.6, #37) 9) Hooks (2.4, #51) 10) Nelson (2.4, #51) 11) Pitcher (2.4, #51) 12) Owusu-Anane (2.4, #51) 13) Basa Ama (2.2, #64) 14) Lesmond (2.0, #71) 15) Wojcik (1.9, #80) 16) Jarvis (1.8, #91) Just outside the Top 100: Sakota, Mahoney, Knowling, Robledo, O'Neil, Langborg One thing that struck me was how wide the representation went. Six schools have at least two players in the Top 100 between 2018 and 2021. Next year, 26 of the Top 100 all time Ivy recruits will be playing and 33 of the Top 150. There's a lot of talent in this league. Will be interesting to see how it all comes together. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32834 |
03-24-21 02:44 PM - Post#322503
And it's your view that this is any more likely to result in statistical accuracy (or on-court success) than is the NFL or NBA draft, based on far more developed metrics than high school basketball? Because both NFL and NBA success is notably hit or miss when it comes to draft position. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
03-24-21 03:01 PM - Post#322504
Generally recruiting rankings have predictive power at the top and bottom end. That is, the highest end of Ivy recruits in terms of rankings have very high hit rates and the bottom (no rankings at all) have had very low hit rates, while everything in between tended to be meaningless. IIRC the last model I ran basically had win share credit for the top recruits (say 2* average and up) and then win share credit for the *number* of recruits. So, I don't think the model is telling us a ton we don't already know: Really highly rated recruits are generally good, and anything beneath that is a relative crapshoot. Anecdotally, I think the model could be greatly improved with *real* offers, but those are hard to come by in a bulk fashion. My own guesses at contributions aren't really based on this model but rather offers and what the programs are seeing from their players. |
|
OldBig5 Masters Student Posts 639 |
03-24-21 04:07 PM - Post#322505
Generally recruiting rankings have predictive power at the top and bottom end. That is, the highest end of Ivy recruits in terms of rankings have very high hit rates and the bottom (no rankings at all) have had very low hit rates, while everything in between tended to be meaningless. IIRC the last model I ran basically had win share credit for the top recruits (say 2* average and up) and then win share credit for the *number* of recruits. So, I don't think the model is telling us a ton we don't already know: Really highly rated recruits are generally good, and anything beneath that is a relative crapshoot. Anecdotally, I think the model could be greatly improved with *real* offers, but those are hard to come by in a bulk fashion. My own guesses at contributions aren't really based on this model but rather offers and what the programs are seeing from their players. That makes lots of sense based on what I have seen over the years. Thanks for your analysis and rankings also. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
03-30-21 04:34 PM - Post#322645
Fired up the model again. Here's the class-by-class Win Share projections at present (win shares projected, rank among all classes since 2002, out of 160): 1. Harvard 2019 (28.3, #6) 2. Harvard 2018 (24.3, #10) 3. Harvard 2020 (22.8, #14) 4. Princeton 2018 (21.3, #21) 5. Penn 2019 (20.9, #25 6. Columbia 2021 (17.9, #43) 7. Yale 2020 (16.9, #49) 8. Princeton 2019 (16.3, #51) 9. Dartmouth 2019 (15.4, #62) 10. Cornell 2020 (14.7, #69) 11. Princeton 2021 (14.5, #74) 12. Columbia 2019 (13.4, #84) 13. Penn 2021 (13.0, #89) 14. Brown 2021 (12.8, #92) 15. Brown 2020 (11.6, #109) 16. Columbia 2018 (10.7, #115) 17. Brown 2018 (10.7, #116) 18. Columbia 2020 (10.5, #119) 19. Penn 2020 (10.2, #120) 20. Princeton 2020 (10.2, #121) 21. Cornell 2019 (10.0, #123) 22. Dartmouth 2020 (10.0, #124) 23. Yale 2021 (9.3, #131) 24. Penn 2018 (9.0, #133) 25. Cornell 2021 (8.8, #137) 26. Dartmouth 2021 (8.8, #138) 27. Yale 2018 (8.3, #140) 28. Harvard 2021 (7.1, #143) 29. Brown 2019 (7.0, #145) 30. Dartmouth 2018 (6.6, #146) 31. Cornell 2018 (6.0, #149) 32. Yale 2019 (5.9, #150) And at a total team level, here's where the predicted win shares stand for the 2018-2021 classes: Harvard 83 Princeton 62 Penn 53 Columbia 52 Brown 42 Yale 41 Dartmouth 41 Cornell 40 The top and bottom two are pretty unsurprising, but the middle is incredibly interesting. Brown and Yale dramatically underachieve for two different reasons. The model hates small classes, so Yale gets dinged in 2019 and 2021 (2 and 3, so far, respectively). And despite Brown's classes having some heft, there is a tremendous mismatch for how those classes are viewed in New England versus by the national recruiting services. Meanwhile, Princeton and Penn recruited four more players in the past three classes than Yale and Columbia recruited six more, which is much of the reason why two of Yale's last three classes are among the six worst over these four years while only Penn 2018 is in the Bottom 10 from those three schools from 2019-2021. Then, if you look at just the two classes we haven't seen (2020 and 2021), here are the expected Win Shares: Harvard 31 Columbia 28 Yale 26 Princeton 25 Brown 24 Cornell 24 Penn 23 Dartmouth 19 Clearly, if you take out Penn's substantial 2019 class, it sinks quickly. Yale's two-person 2019 class gets removed, so it subsequently rises. The watchout, though, is that the average win share year across the sample is 13.7, so only two teams are seen has having recruited "above average" for this cycle. I don't think that matches reality, and I do think that there are two reasons for it: 1) Many ratings systems just aren't going as deep as they used to, leading to a lot more "0s" that would have been 1 or 2 stars when, say, Future150 and ESPN were more active. For instance, from 2010 to 2017, ESPN recognized 240 out of 298 Ivy recruits (many as NR, but at least recognized). But it pivoted its strategy to only focus on the top 200 or so in 2018, and since has only recognized 48 over 139. This has a slight impact on the model, as the model rewards team for the sum of average recruit scores and the difference between a half-star and zero-star rating over a handful of recruits can meaningfully change expected WS. 2) Ivies aren't loading classes as much as they used to be. The Ivies recruited 39 kids per class over the first six years of the 2010s, but only 35 per class during the 2018-2021 cycle. Since the model sees value in having more D1 credible recruits to choose from, lowering the number of recruits lowers the average number of win shares. For these reasons, I think the model can still be a useful relative assessment tool, but it struggles at comparing across cohorts given the changes in the ratings systems strategies. All previous caveats apply, including, most importantly, the notes that regional recruiting rankings and true offers would lend a LOT more predictive ability to this model if they could be reasonably attained. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
04-01-21 01:00 AM - Post#322711
Thanks, mrjames. You may have explained this in the past, but is your model based on regressions from recruiting data and player contributions, or based on an intuition of most likely factors and their relative weight? |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
04-01-21 11:37 AM - Post#322766
The model is based on team-level win shares by class compared against the aggregated ratings for that class. It is indeed a multiple regression analysis with the features being number of recruits, sum of recruiting scores and recruits between 1.5 and 2.0 and 2.5 and 3.0 stars (which the model sees as generally over-rated when controlling for their contribution to the sum of scores). A zero-star recruit is worth 2.8 average win shares, while a one-star recruit is worth 4.4 average win shares. But then, while the stars keep adding to the Sum of Scores, for 1.5 to 3 there is a penalty that takes away some of that benefit, as traditionally, recruits rated in that range don't perform increasingly well. That stops at 3-star and above where the performance is very strong. I made a couple of tweaks to the model and will adjust the numbers above, but that's basically what's happening. Still... I think that having regional recruiting rankings and offers would MASSIVELY improve model performance (especially at the individual level, where this model isn't very strong at all). |
|
|
 |
|
| Copyright © 2004-2012 Basketball U. Terms of Use for our Site and Privacy Policy are applicable to you. All rights reserved. Basketball U. and its subsidiaries are not affiliated in any way with any NCAA athletic conference or member institution. |
|