Big Ten Cancels Fall Football (CFB Thread)

Status
Not open for further replies.
#201      
Admin
Can we change the Thread heading to "Big Ten Postpones ..." - since that is what has been planned?
There will be no Big Ten football in the fall, and there's no official plans for what comes next at this time, the thread title's fine. When there's official word from the B1G about a new schedule for 2021 or on Sept. 1st, whichever comes first, we'll start fresh with a new college football thread :thumb:
 
Last edited:
#202      
Chicago, IL
As long as class is in session, they should be allowed to play football. A football roster is a drop in the pool compared to the entire student population. And selfishly, yes, I would like to watch them play even if it's a couple games. I just got to watch the blackhawks play for 2 weeks (only sport I watch besides Illinois) and it was awesome.
Just hypothetically, a football player travels to another Big Ten school, gets the virus, brings it back to IL, and infects people in his class. Unlikely, but not impossible.

I'm not saying this to support the cancellation/postponement of the season (though I do), but to negate that "a drop in the pool" means nothing. A drop in the pool is how every outbreak started.
 
#203      

Deleted member 29907

D
Guest
As long as class is in session, they should be allowed to play football. A football roster is a drop in the pool compared to the entire student population. And selfishly, yes, I would like to watch them play even if it's a couple games. I just got to watch the blackhawks play for 2 weeks (only sport I watch besides Illinois) and it was awesome.
If you (and the fellow 'likers' of your post) don't understand the difference between kids going to class, wearing masks, keeping distance and being careful (which i see as problematic anyway - see UNC, ND, etc) vs individuals in close sweaty contact in large groups, and traveling to other schools, playing other teams then I guess I am done with the back and forth on this. Stay safe everyone - looking forward to Spring Ball!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
#204      
If you (and the fellow 'likers' of your post) don't understand the difference between kids going to class, wearing masks, keeping distance and being careful (which i see as problematic anyway - see UNC, ND, etc) vs individuals in close sweaty contact in large groups, and traveling to other schools, playing other teams then I guess I am done with the back and forth on this. Stay safe everyone - looking forward to Spring Ball!
I understand the difference between sitting on class and playing football. I also know that there are a lot of activities on campus that take place outside of the classroom where the virus will spread.
 
#205      
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mo...d-to-covid-19-to-miss-2020-season/ar-BB18c9fg

I'm not a big fan of anecdotes compared with data, but this instance does bring up a good point. If the primary motivation for playing football would be to allow "dreams to survive," then how does that square with those dreams that will be crushed due to long-term health impacts? What if the next Joe Burrow contracts a severe case of Covid while traveling to another college campus?
 
#206      
I understand the difference between sitting on class and playing football. I also know that there are a lot of activities on campus that take place outside of the classroom where the virus will spread.

That bolded part is exactly what got UNC. I see your point but differ in where I land. I would say that having classes fully online would be more conducive to having a football season, since it would then be easier to insulate football players from other students. And, it would open the possibility of doing something like a bubble, or at the very least creating a bubble-like atmospheres on each campus.

FWIW, as I said earlier, I'd bet that classes are back online after a month or so at max. There's just no good way to control the activities of young people in general, let alone 40,000+ of them.
 
#207      
That bolded part is exactly what got UNC. I see your point but differ in where I land. I would say that having classes fully online would be more conducive to having a football season, since it would then be easier to insulate football players from other students. And, it would open the possibility of doing something like a bubble, or at the very least creating a bubble-like atmospheres on each campus.

FWIW, as I said earlier, I'd bet that classes are back online after a month or so at max. There's just no good way to control the activities of young people in general, let alone 40,000+ of them.

I rarely entertain the cynical side of my mind, but it's telling me it'll be just after the full tuition refund deadline. Here at UIowa, that's 9/22.
 
#208      
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mo...d-to-covid-19-to-miss-2020-season/ar-BB18c9fg

I'm not a big fan of anecdotes compared with data, but this instance does bring up a good point. If the primary motivation for playing football would be to allow "dreams to survive," then how does that square with those dreams that will be crushed due to long-term health impacts? What if the next Joe Burrow contracts a severe case of Covid while traveling to another college campus?

But isn't that up to the player?

The next Joe Burrow could have a career ending knee injury in the first game of his "breakout" year but coaches/ADs/university presidents can't force him to sit out just because there is a potential of injury. That player chooses to play the full season, or sit out, depending on what's best for him and accepts the risk.

Obviously, this is all contingent on schools/Athletic Departments/teams having and sticking to robust testing/quarantining processes to avoid a massive outbreak. But that can be done. And if a player does get the virus, and gets the heart condition, they should sit out. The heart condition is detectable, so once it's detected, sorry charlie...you're done. (just like a season ending knee injury)

Eduardo Rodriguez has been a good example of this condition in the sports world. Got COVID > Recovered from COVID/developed myocarditis > Out for season. As of now, he's expected to make a Full Recovery. (Key word right now is expected...the article also speaks to myocarditis not being new, interesting stuff) The kicker in all this? He contracted the virus in Miami BEFORE he arrived at camp by being near someone who was sick. Source So it wasn't due to playing sports, but being in society.

Since the chances of our athletes catching the virus is probably the same (maybe even more) if they are at home/unregulated/hanging out with friends, a case of myocarditis could go undetected. These young men are active and will maintain being active even if they aren't on campus. Not knowing you have myocarditis and overexerting yourself because of that ignorance can be fatal.

Even with the season being canceled, I hope we continue to practice to keep the players in a safe/regulated/highly scrutinized environment. And when they do go home, I hope the university treats every COVID case with complimentary screens for myocarditis even if the player has made a full recovery.
 
Last edited:
#209      
Remember when I said there would be consequences to this decision. Well we are about to see them all over college athletics. Thousands are going to lose their jobs and thousands of students will lose their free college. College athletic departments don’t make as much money as people think, take away college football and this is what happens.
 
Last edited:
#210      
The Transfer Portal
Remember when I said there would be consequences to this decision.

Did anybody disagree with this? There are no awesome paths forward here, that's why it's a crisis.

Pandemics are bad and lead to almost exclusively bad outcomes. This is why we should do everything we can to prevent them and, when we fail at that, to end them as quickly as possible.
 
#211      
Remember when I said there would be consequences to this decision.

Everyone knows there are consequences. We don't know those consequences reliably enough to come to a consensus, and even if we did, there would be different opinions based on who is taking the risk, how much you value human life, etc..

IMO, the main thing to remember is there isn't a good answer when you have a pandemic that's killing large numbers of people, other than to get it under control. Unfortunately, we've gone the path of herd immunity, and by my estimates*, we're not quite there yet.

*I understand this is a controversial topic, and expect no one to take my opinion seriously. It depends on the R-naught, the rate of infection vs actual cases, cross-immunity, and other variables. The data I've given most weight says there are some states over the hump, and others (e.g. Hawaii, new cases 7 day avg that are going hyperbolic). I tend find that data convincing, but I'm a non-expert. YMMV
 
#212      
#213      
Did anybody disagree with this? There are no awesome paths forward here, that's why it's a crisis.

Pandemics are bad and lead to almost exclusively bad outcomes. This is why we should do everything we can to prevent them and, when we fail at that, to end them as quickly as possible.
Yes they did actually disagree. And actually gymnastics were the very sport this guy said wasn’t going to get cut lol.
4845DC79-9728-4A42-8504-B855EDF3961D.png
 
#214      
To be fair, he was talking about Illinois gymnastics being cut due to losing a year of Illinois football. :thumb:

I think we can all agree that all the bad outcomes/consequences from a pandemic (or any disaster really) should definitely be funneled in Iowa's direction.









I'm joking...just in case it wasn't obvious. I would never wish harm on the students or innocent people affiliated with that school. If only we could figure out the trigger word that will snap them out of whatever trance Fran McCaffery put them under to make them want to go to Iowa.
 
Last edited:
#215      
Forgottonia
Everyone knows there are consequences. We don't know those consequences reliably enough to come to a consensus, and even if we did, there would be different opinions based on who is taking the risk, how much you value human life, etc..

IMO, the main thing to remember is there isn't a good answer when you have a pandemic that's killing large numbers of people, other than to get it under control. Unfortunately, we've gone the path of herd immunity, and by my estimates*, we're not quite there yet.

*I understand this is a controversial topic, and expect no one to take my opinion seriously. It depends on the R-naught, the rate of infection vs actual cases, cross-immunity, and other variables. The data I've given most weight says there are some states over the hump, and others (e.g. Hawaii, new cases 7 day avg that are going hyperbolic). I tend find that data convincing, but I'm a non-expert. YMMV
Hawaii is a head scratcher with their lockdown. I’m very interested to see what happens at Illinois. They have a great protocol and testing ability. If successful it will be a model to be followed, if not, we still don’t know anything about this virus.
 
#216      

Deleted member 29907

D
Guest
I understand the difference between sitting on class and playing football. I also know that there are a lot of activities on campus that take place outside of the classroom where the virus will spread.
Which is what i called problematic. It's the reason schools are going online a week after opening. I'd fear the same for football and potentially risking any hope of spring ball.
 
#217      
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mo...d-to-covid-19-to-miss-2020-season/ar-BB18c9fg

I'm not a big fan of anecdotes compared with data, but this instance does bring up a good point. If the primary motivation for playing football would be to allow "dreams to survive," then how does that square with those dreams that will be crushed due to long-term health impacts? What if the next Joe Burrow contracts a severe case of Covid while traveling to another college campus?
Thats a terrible example because if his season was cancelled there might not be a Joe Burrows in the NFL.
 
#218      
st petersburg, fl
Yes they did actually disagree. And actually gymnastics were the very sport this guy said wasn’t going to get cut lol. View attachment 6279

ha, appreciate the look back! Almost missed it since i wasn't officially quoted...

I'll reiterate what I said before...multiple times. I said that I wouldn't be surprised if some programs cut sports. I also stated certain cuts would have to be made (though it doesn't necessarily have to be entire sports). My point was, and still is, there are other options out there than blatantly cutting sports cuz of 1 year of lost revenue. It's called bridge financing. In this environment, any program that isn't able to raise this is not doing all they can to save programs. That's a failure of management, not an inevitability. I stick by that statement.

IL DIA - if you're reading this, reach out to me. Happy to go through options with you. I'm not a banker, but happy to lay out the options and point you to people that can help directly.
 
#219      
The other article from Robert? I like Robert, but he is one voice/opinion. We can create opinions all we want on our assumptions. My assumption is that the other P5s will cancel the season 2 weeks in (much like many schools are going online and the MLB pullback) and will have then trashed their season - so our plan to play in the Spring would look pretty good then compared to that. Dreams of the early P5 players dashed?

If we don't play in the spring - there is always the fall, and then the following year to catch their dream in the NFL. Not playing in the spring is not a cancelation of their playing careers. I don't get this "now or never" logic. In effect, its equivalent to a 5th year player timeline. Football is a sport where another year of maturity is not that bad.

All of this 'play now' talk seems to be more geared toward "I want to watch my team play now" rather than looking out for the players.
So what do you do with all the high school players since your going to grant the college kids more eligibility and increased rosters cost money which after this athletic programs wont have.
 
#220      
Which is what i called problematic. It's the reason schools are going online a week after opening. I'd fear the same for football and potentially risking any hope of spring ball.
Yeah I agree with you there. We had the poll recently for how many games would be played this season, I voted 1-4, expecting the lower end. I feel like it may have been possible to accomplish at least one. We will find out soon enough I guess with the other conferences
 
#222      

Deleted member 29907

D
Guest
So what do you do with all the high school players since your going to grant the college kids more eligibility and increased rosters cost money which after this athletic programs wont have.
Pretty sure they can 'find' the money if they need to. However, it could be a tough call. You don't need to offer a 5th year extension to players who don't have a reasonable chance of seeing the field/court/track, etc. They've gotten a chance to earn a degree. Give them automatic transfer no sit opportunities. The net is, in worse case scenario - some are going to be delayed, and likely bench sitters may have to move on. The high school players at the low end of the overall opportunity (2*s, etc) are probably not gonna make it.

Regardless of how it works out, you don't make the decision to play based on how it disrupts a players opportunity in the future - you make it based on your confidence that you can contain risk and keep your players and staff safe. There are people who have lost jobs and are struggling with very real life issues during this. Losing a season of playing opportunity just seems minor in comparison. Pandemics suck.
 
#225      
Forgottonia
Pretty sure they can 'find' the money if they need to. However, it could be a tough call. You don't need to offer a 5th year extension to players who don't have a reasonable chance of seeing the field/court/track, etc. They've gotten a chance to earn a degree. Give them automatic transfer no sit opportunities. The net is, in worse case scenario - some are going to be delayed, and likely bench sitters may have to move on. The high school players at the low end of the overall opportunity (2*s, etc) are probably not gonna make it.

Regardless of how it works out, you don't make the decision to play based on how it disrupts a players opportunity in the future - you make it based on your confidence that you can contain risk and keep your players and staff safe. There are people who have lost jobs and are struggling with very real life issues during this. Losing a season of playing opportunity just seems minor in comparison. Pandemics suck.
My understanding is that all players are granted an extra year if the season is not played or if they choose to sit out because of covid concerns. Is this not the official policy?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.