College Football and Covid19 (Cancellations, Postponements etc)

[titansNvolsR#1]

1 hour ago, candyman93 said:

It’s like I said before. The big 10 teams have other reliable forms of income. Ohio State is building a 1.8 billion medical wing.

 

Where’s the extra money for LSU outside of football?

Eh. UF, Vandy, UT all do quite fine with research contracts. Don't know enough about the other schools.

It's not like any of these schools would go under without football.

[thrILL!]

2 hours ago, candyman93 said:

Where’s the extra money for LSU outside of football?

Corn dogs are a billion dollar industry. 

[NateDawg]

Teams like Ohio State want to play football and are fighting for it.  This whole episode has shown how archaic and behind the times some of these Big Ten administrators are.  When much of the rest of the country of all ages is playing.  I can't imagine a team like Alabama allowing programs like Vanderbilt to dictate whether they played for a National Championship or not or basically participated in a meaningless exhibition season.  That's crazy to even picture.  Of course it makes sense that some of these other Big Ten programs don't care whether the season starts in mid-October or post-Thanksgiving.  They aren't playing for a playoff anyways.  It's crazy seeing teams like Maryland and Rutgers (or even the Michigan schools) having a say in whether other teams are aloud to participate or not.  If it's healthy to play in late November then it sure as heck is in October.  If it's too risky in general, just cancel the season and move on, but of course that should happen across the board were that the case.  If you don't want to play, don't play though.  If there are 8 teams that want to play within the conference, just play each other.  Multiple times even, who cares.  Nobody is forcing you to play if you don't want to though.  This shouldn't be as hard as they are making it, but politics are certainly involved here.  It seems to me that a number of 'leaders' are stalling in an effort to make a meaningful season not possible.  The Big Ten is making a bigger arse of themselves for every day that goes on here where there's no understanding on return to play. 

[MWil23]

8 hours ago, NateDawg said:

Teams like Ohio State want to play football and are fighting for it.  This whole episode has shown how archaic and behind the times some of these Big Ten administrators are.  When much of the rest of the country of all ages is playing.  I can't imagine a team like Alabama allowing programs like Vanderbilt to dictate whether they played for a National Championship or not or basically participated in a meaningless exhibition season.  That's crazy to even picture.  Of course it makes sense that some of these other Big Ten programs don't care whether the season starts in mid-October or post-Thanksgiving.  They aren't playing for a playoff anyways.  It's crazy seeing teams like Maryland and Rutgers (or even the Michigan schools) having a say in whether other teams are aloud to participate or not.  If it's healthy to play in late November then it sure as heck is in October.  If it's too risky in general, just cancel the season and move on, but of course that should happen across the board were that the case.  If you don't want to play, don't play though.  If there are 8 teams that want to play within the conference, just play each other.  Multiple times even, who cares.  Nobody is forcing you to play if you don't want to though.  This shouldn't be as hard as they are making it, but politics are certainly involved here.  It seems to me that a number of 'leaders' are stalling in an effort to make a meaningful season not possible.  The Big Ten is making a bigger arse of themselves for every day that goes on here where there's no understanding on return to play. 

Per the bold, those three are my biggest gripes about playing/not playing.

1. I coach HS Football, and Week 3 starts tomorrow night where almost every school around the state, even those who have gone exclusively remote, are suiting up and playing. Someone explain to me the logic on Governors from states like Ohio and Michigan saying it's safe for 12-18 year old kids to play (junior high and high school, as pee wee is private and not school affiliated), but it's too dangerous for 19-22 year old men/students.

2. How does pushing the season back 8 weeks make it safe to play in a COVID19 era? 

3. Once again, the NCAA proves its complete incompetence. They refuse to govern the entirety of the nation on this, and pass the buck to local schools/governing bodies, instead of either red or green lighting the entire process. Even IF this was acceptable (it's not), then step in and give EVERY SINGLE PLAYER the right to opt out of the season, ensuring that they keep their scholarship/ensure their right to safety as they (the player!) judges, while then allowing teams to play under universal guidelines implemented by the CDC (that's what we have to do in HS).

I'll be honest, if these other teams in the B1G decide to assert themselves on canceling for everyone, despite the other schools wanting to play, then the 8 teams that want to play should leave ASAP after their contracts expire, or just pay the termination fee, form their own conference/go to others, and move on and let Rutgers, Maryland, Northwestern, Indiana and Illinois form the equivalent of the BIG EAST, where you can all be somewhat competitive in basketball (not you Rutgers or Northwestern) and totally suck at football.

[winitall]

21 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

Per the bold, those three are my biggest gripes about playing/not playing.

1. I coach HS Football, and Week 3 starts tomorrow night where almost every school around the state, even those who have gone exclusively remote, are suiting up and playing. Someone explain to me the logic on Governors from states like Ohio and Michigan saying it's safe for 12-18 year old kids to play (junior high and high school, as pee wee is private and not school affiliated), but it's too dangerous for 19-22 year old men/students.

2. How does pushing the season back 8 weeks make it safe to play in a COVID19 era? 

3. Once again, the NCAA proves its complete incompetence. They refuse to govern the entirety of the nation on this, and pass the buck to local schools/governing bodies, instead of either red or green lighting the entire process. Even IF this was acceptable (it's not), then step in and give EVERY SINGLE PLAYER the right to opt out of the season, ensuring that they keep their scholarship/ensure their right to safety as they (the player!) judges, while then allowing teams to play under universal guidelines implemented by the CDC (that's what we have to do in HS).

I'll be honest, if these other teams in the B1G decide to assert themselves on canceling for everyone, despite the other schools wanting to play, then the 8 teams that want to play should leave ASAP after their contracts expire, or just pay the termination fee, form their own conference/go to others, and move on and let Rutgers, Maryland, Northwestern, Indiana and Illinois form the equivalent of the BIG EAST, where you can all be somewhat competitive in basketball (not you Rutgers or Northwestern) and totally suck at football.

I’ll take a stab at answering these:

1. The governors didn’t make the decision not to play. Michigan’s governor has come out and said that she supported the B1G’s decision, but that she wasn’t the one making it. That was left up to the school presidents to decide on. Michigan didn’t really even want high school sports in the fall, only opting to play them in the last week or so. No idea on Ohio. 
 

2. Pushing back the season 8 weeks would be enough time to help get the virus under control in any component nation. That would be the goal. It doesn’t matter given the fact that cases are still crazy high and there’s no real end coming to the 1,000 deaths a day, but that doesn’t make it wrong to be cautious and to try and wait and see if anything improves. Even in the last month or two, we’ve seen advances with the rapid tests that could be incredibly beneficial to schools trying to play safely. 
 

3. I think everyone is in agreement that the NCAA should have stepped in. The NCAA should have made the tough decisions because that is their job. Instead they chose to just hang out and let everyone do their own thing.

TBH, I don’t understand why everyone thinks that the B1G made the wrong decision just because other groups have decided to play. It reminds me of when people complain that their state has a mask mandate but another doesn’t. Just because someone else is making a suboptimal decision in the face of the facts, doesn’t mean that everyone has to make that same decision. (That also doesn’t mean that I think the B1G presidents have been perfect. Universities should 100% be online right now and then with testing advances they would actually have a shot at playing relatively safely)  

 

[MWil23]

9 minutes ago, winitall said:

I’ll take a stab at answering these:

1. The governors didn’t make the decision not to play. Michigan’s governor has come out and said that she supported the B1G’s decision, but that she wasn’t the one making it. That was left up to the school presidents to decide on. Michigan didn’t really even want high school sports in the fall, only opting to play them in the last week or so. No idea on Ohio. 

Correct, that's my point. If Governors give the green light, then restricting what the state governor says is, IMO, a mistake. I'm looking at you NCAA

9 minutes ago, winitall said:

2. Pushing back the season 8 weeks would be enough time to help get the virus under control in any component nation. That would be the goal. It doesn’t matter given the fact that cases are still crazy high and there’s no real end coming to the 1,000 deaths a day, but that doesn’t make it wrong to be cautious and to try and wait and see if anything improves. Even in the last month or two, we’ve seen advances with the rapid tests that could be incredibly beneficial to schools trying to play safely. 

Hard disagree, especially with MILLIONS of fall athletes playing across the country already. It should absolutely be a universal/nationwide mandate, per our points about the NCAA above and below.

9 minutes ago, winitall said:

3. I think everyone is in agreement that the NCAA should have stepped in. The NCAA should have made the tough decisions because that is their job. Instead they chose to just hang out and let everyone do their own thing.

They're more interested in passing the buck and covering their own backside than stepping in and doing their job. It's laughable. 

9 minutes ago, winitall said:

TBH, I don’t understand why everyone thinks that the B1G made the wrong decision just because other groups have decided to play. It reminds me of when people complain that their state has a mask mandate but another doesn’t.

Again, the hypocritical nature is my problem. You can have 60,000 kids on campus living together, going to school together, paying BILLIONS of dollars in tuition and room and board, but you can't play sports with restrictions, despite millions of others playing in junior high and high school, not to mention elsewhere in the country in college? That's absurd. 

9 minutes ago, winitall said:

Just because someone else is making a suboptimal decision in the face of the facts, doesn’t mean that everyone has to make that same decision. (That also doesn’t mean that I think the B1G presidents have been perfect. Universities should 100% be online right now and then with testing advances they would actually have a shot at playing relatively safely)  

Again, it comes down to a governing body (The NCAA) not stepping in, and then because of a majority vote, you innately mess over those who want to play. Again, the inconsistency is my gripe. You have MILLIONS of kids playing sports and attending school, living in close proximity with one another, but you can't have sports? That's stupid. Per the bold, that's my biggest gripe, the inconsistency. If it's too unsafe to play, it's too unsafe to go face to face. They're hypocrites. 

[Mastercheddaar]

If the B1G Ten wanted to they could start their season on Oct 10. Just have the East Division play the 6 teams in their division and likewise for the West. Then have a Conference Champ game on week 7. That way whoever wins can still have a chance to play in the playoffs. 

MC

[Duluther]

I feel for Day and OSU's players (among others in the conference). OSU needs to continue putting the pressure on; if the conference doesn't get its crap together, OSU should move on without them.

[candyman93]

17 minutes ago, Duluther said:

OSU should move on without them.

That would never happen.

[Oregon Ducks]

The B1G is looking really bad right now...all of them - Presidents, ADs, Coaches, Parents. At least in the PAC-12 we all care very little equally.

[NateDawg]

Votes from presidents belonging to schools like Rutgers and Maryland should be like trees that fall in the forest when no one is around. At this point I would be surprised if any plan happens resulting in any relevant fall season. These “leaders” clearly can’t make decisions. 

[ramssuperbowl99]

1 hour ago, NateDawg said:

Votes from presidents belonging to schools like Rutgers and Maryland should be like trees that fall in the forest when no one is around. At this point I would be surprised if any plan happens resulting in any relevant fall season. These “leaders” clearly can’t make decisions. 

I hereby disallow the votes from Rutgers and Maryland.

We are now processing a formal recount to appease your request. We'll let you know when the recount results are available.

 

The results are in! The vote was 9-3 in favor of delaying the season. You can stop talking about Rutgers and Maryland now.

[MWil23]

4 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

You can stop talking about Rutgers and Maryland now.

That's the first time either has been relevant in quite some time. You're such an elitist.

[ramssuperbowl99]

Just now, MWil23 said:

That's the first time either has been relevant in quite some time. You're such an elitist.

My entire point is that they aren't, and haven't ever been relevant. 

Honestly the mental gymnastics of losing a vote 11-3 and then somehow thinking that if 2 of the 11 tank everything might be different is borderline SEC level behavior.

[winitall]

10 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

I hereby disallow the votes from Rutgers and Maryland.

We are now processing a formal recount to appease your request. We'll let you know when the recount results are available.

 

The results are in! The vote was 9-3 in favor of delaying the season. You can stop talking about Rutgers and Maryland now.

I would love to attend a B1G presidents meeting where OSU attempts a motion that the other schools are no longer allowed to vote. 
 

OSU: I hereby move that future voting rights only be given to ourselves and Nebraska. 
 

Nebraska: We will second that motion. 
 

Everyone else: That’s going to be a no.

Vote fails 12-2.