The ACC will delay the start of competition for all fall sports until at least Sept. 1

[Augusta_Jacket]

The NBA has G-League, and the NCAA is an even better farm system for the NBA than it is for the NFL. The NFL has tried Arena League and NFL Europe, so they’re interested in something as a second junior league.
At least some vocal players in the Pac12 are showing that they think they’re getting the short end of the stick this season (or more so than usual). That, plus name and likeness, makes me think that more change is coming to college football.
While this isn’t the year that the NFL will be taking on more risk, you’d think they’re looking at this season in college football as a risk going forward for them. They might do something to cover that risk.

You'd hope, but in reality, the NFL has always acted to preserve the free college system that feeds them. Remember when Maurice Clarett tried to go early and the NFL clamped down hard?

 

[Deleted member 2897]

I am guessing this (click through to read full thread) is similar on most campuses. If they really cared for people’s well being and possible heart issues, they’d be canceling college and not football. Student athletes (with tremendous help and policing by coaches and staff) operate much more safely than the General student population.

 

[Wrecked]

I am guessing this (click through to read full thread) is similar on most campuses. If they really cared for people’s well being and possible heart issues, they’d be canceling college and not football. Student athletes (with tremendous help and policing by coaches and staff) operate much more safely than the General student population.

I think the colleges do care about the students, but shockingly the students aren't following the rules. Why does this surprise anybody? It also shows why liability of the schools is almost nil. You can't prove where you get this virus and if the students don't follow the rules established by the school, how is the school liable. I mean you can sue, anyone can sue, but I am not sure how you would win. Also if the colleges opened thinking there were not going to be outbreaks, they are just naive.

 

[bobongo]

I stayed out of this debate yesterday and I am glad. People on both sides of the "should we play" debate want college football. I see that clearly. My current view is that we will know pretty soon and any "I told you so" will be very non-productive.

In my business life, whenever I was faced with a controversial decision, I tried to block out the noise around me and concentrate on the problems at hand and the possible solutions. Hearing what people want to happen wasn't very helpful. I hope that is what the college presidents and conference commissioners are doing right now. All of us want college football, but that desire should not drive this decision if the leaders are doing their job.

Good post. There are two sides to this issue. One thing we should all keep in mind is that there is both enormous pressure to play and enormous pressure not to play coming from all directions. It's a tough call. The only thing I know for sure is that if there's no season, I'm going to miss it.

 

[RonJohn]

I actually think this statement from the SEC commissioner is probably better than most of the statements made on here or touted by media people. He basically says that the SEC is delaying things as long as possible and delaying decisions. He says that he doesn't know if they will be able to play, but they aren't giving up as of yet.

Like I said before, we won't know for sure until either games begin or postponements are announced.

 

[WreckinGT]

I am guessing this (click through to read full thread) is similar on most campuses. If they really cared for people’s well being and possible heart issues, they’d be canceling college and not football. Student athletes (with tremendous help and policing by coaches and staff) operate much more safely than the General student population.

When student athletes are not participating in athletic activities, what are the coaching staffs doing to ensure they are staying safe away from the field?

 

[Deleted member 2897]

When student athletes are not participating in athletic activities, what are the coaching staffs doing to ensure they are staying safe away from the field?

They probably sleep 50+ hours a week. They probably also spend 50+ hours a week between weights, practice, tape sessions, team meetings. They are in a much better and more controlled environment than the average student.

 

[RamblinRed]

Interestingly, The ACC has consistently been the most aggressive about trying to play, moreso than even the SEC.

Going to be an interesting week and frankly just points out how not having a central national leadership is hurting college football right now.

Keep in mind that everyone who is commenting right now is not a decision maker. Presidents haven't really said a word.

This article does a good job of explaining where everything is right now. PAC12 and BIG10 are leaning toward cancelling, ACC and SEC want to continue toward playing and the Big12 is split pretty much down the middle and could go either way.
https://www.si.com/college/2020/08/11/power-5-conferences-face-pivotal-decision-fall-season

If conferences hang on they still aren't committed to playing, just to letting things play out longer. If students show up on campuses and case rates start to increase again then there will be no football in any conference. To this point the football players have largely been in a bubble, but as other students arrive that will change.

The medical report that is being presented to the PAC12 Presidents today could be important to what happens going forward. There is also a report that at least 5 B10 players have myocarditis due to COVID. Those kind of issues are going to weigh heavily on University Presidents.
https://sports.yahoo.com/report-at-...lly-caused-by-viral-infections-224809885.html
I could see why the B10 Presidents may be getting cold feet. If they have at least 5 cases of myocarditis already and they don't even have the student bodies back, i'm sure they are worried how many more might end up with that condition.

According to a CDC study from June, 2.5% of all confirmed cases in 10-19 yr olds ended up in hospitalization (14.9% of those with underlying conditions, 2.3% of those without conditions). Among 20-29 yr olds it was 3.7% (17.9% w/conditions, 2.7% without). If you assume infections are 10X confirmed cases that would mean 1 out of every 400 10-19 yr olds end up in the hospital.

It wouldn't shock me if what happens is more punting and everyone just decides to stay in limbo for another few weeks. That has sort of been how college football has advanced for months now.
IMO if a league knows they are going to cancel they should go ahead and cancel so that players and coaches aren't left in limbo and they need to be able to explain why they cancelled and it would help if they also had answers to questions about what that means for football in the future (when do you plan on playing again, do players get redshirts and not lose eligibility, etc). If you aren't sure about cancelling then you should continue waiting - but you also need to be clear in that instance as well that you aren't committing to playing, that you are committed to waiting longer before making a final decision whether to play or not. I think that is largely what the SEC comment is.

 

[WreckinGT]

They probably sleep 50+ hours a week. They probably also spend 50+ hours a week between weights, practice, tape sessions, team meetings. They are in a much better and more controlled environment than the average student.

They aren't in a bubble. They will be doing the same things other students do including parties, classes, and hanging out with friends. On top of that, their extra curricular activities involve rubbing against multiple other people and breathing heavily on them many many times a day. They will be tested more which will help, but im not sure why exactly they are safer.

 

[ramblinwreckguru]

They aren't in a bubble. They will be doing the same things other students do including parties, classes, and hanging out with friends. On top of that, their extra curricular activities involve rubbing against multiple other people and breathing heavily on them many many times a day. They will be tested more which will help, but im not sure why exactly they are safer.

Which brings me to a real WTF question. How are athletes in a more dangerous position playing sports than the general student population? If going to class and hanging out with friends is safe enough for regular students, why aren't athletes with testing protocols that regular students are not privy to in any worse position?

 

[RonJohn]

Going to be an interesting week and frankly just points out how not having a central national leadership is hurting college football right now.

I still haven't heard anyone explain why universities need strong national leadership to dictate what they do. Media personalities would like a football commissioner so it would be easier to report on. It would be easier to get information, and it would be easier to blame someone and report outrage.

What would it do for college athletics? Should every team's uniforms be approved by a national commissioner's group? Should loud uniforms like Oregon's be banned? Should understated uniforms like Notre Dame's be banned? Should a "commissioner" dictate to the MAC that they play football if they aren't comfortable? Should a "commissioner" dictate that the SEC cannot play, even if they are comfortable?

College football isn't a business that runs multiple franchises. It is a game played between individual universities. Some of those universities enter into conferences with common agendas. Should the individual universities be forced to follow some central ruler? I don't see any reason that they should.

 

[RonJohn]

Which brings me to a real WTF question. How are athletes in a more dangerous position playing sports than the general student population? If going to class and hanging out with friends is safe enough for regular students, why aren't athletes with testing protocols that regular students are not privy to in any worse position?

Students in the general population shouldn't be hanging out with friends in large groups. Students in the general population probably are not getting sweaty and tired while pushing against and tackling each other. Football players are required to push against each other while tired and sweaty and to tackle each other. The testing protocols of MLB have not stopped the virus from spreading within a team once it enters that team.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

I still haven't heard anyone explain why universities need strong national leadership to dictate what they do. Media personalities would like a football commissioner so it would be easier to report on. It would be easier to get information, and it would be easier to blame someone and report outrage.

What would it do for college athletics? Should every team's uniforms be approved by a national commissioner's group? Should loud uniforms like Oregon's be banned? Should understated uniforms like Notre Dame's be banned? Should a "commissioner" dictate to the MAC that they play football if they aren't comfortable? Should a "commissioner" dictate that the SEC cannot play, even if they are comfortable?

College football isn't a business that runs multiple franchises. It is a game played between individual universities. Some of those universities enter into conferences with common agendas. Should the individual universities be forced to follow some central ruler? I don't see any reason that they should.

I agree with you. I like having the individual universities make their own decisions. That doesn't make what @RamblinRed said wrong though. The current situation is more difficult because we don't have central national leadership. Right now there are 65 universities scattered among 5 conferences trying to piecemeal together some semblance of a plan. If ever there was a case for centralized leadership, this is it.

 

[smokey_wasp]

Pac 12 likely out regardless of what Big 10 does. What is currently being reported is that post-viral heart damage/inflammation is what doctors are warning administrators about and that is what is scaring them.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Interestingly, The ACC has consistently been the most aggressive about trying to play, moreso than even the SEC.

Going to be an interesting week and frankly just points out how not having a central national leadership is hurting college football right now.

Keep in mind that everyone who is commenting right now is not a decision maker. Presidents haven't really said a word.

This article does a good job of explaining where everything is right now. PAC12 and BIG10 are leaning toward cancelling, ACC and SEC want to continue toward playing and the Big12 is split pretty much down the middle and could go either way.
https://www.si.com/college/2020/08/11/power-5-conferences-face-pivotal-decision-fall-season

If conferences hang on they still aren't committed to playing, just to letting things play out longer. If students show up on campuses and case rates start to increase again then there will be no football in any conference. To this point the football players have largely been in a bubble, but as other students arrive that will change.

The medical report that is being presented to the PAC12 Presidents today could be important to what happens going forward. There is also a report that at least 5 B10 players have myocarditis due to COVID. Those kind of issues are going to weigh heavily on University Presidents.
https://sports.yahoo.com/report-at-...lly-caused-by-viral-infections-224809885.html
I could see why the B10 Presidents may be getting cold feet. If they have at least 5 cases of myocarditis already and they don't even have the student bodies back, i'm sure they are worried how many more might end up with that condition.

According to a CDC study from June, 2.5% of all confirmed cases in 10-19 yr olds ended up in hospitalization (14.9% of those with underlying conditions, 2.3% of those without conditions). Among 20-29 yr olds it was 3.7% (17.9% w/conditions, 2.7% without). If you assume infections are 10X confirmed cases that would mean 1 out of every 400 10-19 yr olds end up in the hospital.

It wouldn't shock me if what happens is more punting and everyone just decides to stay in limbo for another few weeks. That has sort of been how college football has advanced for months now.
IMO if a league knows they are going to cancel they should go ahead and cancel so that players and coaches aren't left in limbo and they need to be able to explain why they cancelled and it would help if they also had answers to questions about what that means for football in the future (when do you plan on playing again, do players get redshirts and not lose eligibility, etc). If you aren't sure about cancelling then you should continue waiting - but you also need to be clear in that instance as well that you aren't committing to playing, that you are committed to waiting longer before making a final decision whether to play or not. I think that is largely what the SEC comment is.

Yep. More proof it is not a football issue. I am not sure why conferences and the NCAA are struggling with this so much. They are acting as if making a few tackles in a football game is akin to spending several hours in a packed bar. Moreover, if that’s what someone wants to do, especially as a super fit young person, so be it.

 

[RonJohn]

I agree with you. I like having the individual universities make their own decisions. That doesn't make what @RamblinRed said wrong though. The current situation is more difficult because we don't have central national leadership. Right now there are 65 universities scattered among 5 conferences trying to piecemeal together some semblance of a plan. If ever there was a case for centralized leadership, this is it.

The universities can work with their conference and work with each other. It doesn't take a dictator to make decisions for them.

We don't know what the universities and/or conferences have been doing. The public is making assumptions that they haven't consulted medical experts, haven't consulted each other, and have no clue what they are doing.

 

[Techster]

Regardless of how you may feel about playing/not playing, one thing that really bothers me is knowing the SAs have a finite window to play college football. I'm on the conservative side when it comes to the safety and welfare of anyone, but the one thing that pulls me to say let them play is knowing the impact on the SA's college career. If the season gets cancelled, a quarter of an SA's college career is gone and it will all be beyond their control. Imagine being a senior who spent hundreds if not thousands of hours preparing for your last year, and it doesn't happen. We've got guys like Jalen Camp and Jahaziel Lee who were injured last season and worked their way back so they can have one last run to play for GT and be with their teammates...but they might not even get that chance.

Very few SAs get the chance to play at the next level, and college will be their last opportunity. To have that taken away or cut short because of something beyond their control just sucks all around.

 

[smokey_wasp]

Yep. More proof it is not a football issue. I am not sure why conferences and the NCAA are struggling with this so much. They are acting as if making a few tackles in a football game is akin to spending several hours in a packed bar. Moreover, if that’s what someone wants to do, especially as a super fit young person, so be it.

You can't credibly argue football is just making a few tackles, c'mon. There is the huddle, the line of scrimmage where they are breathing heavily in each other's faces all day long, not to mention other team activities. I'm not against playing, but let's use arguments that make sense. To me, a lot of this boils down to just how effective they can be at putting these kids in a bubble. Because the thing is, a single positive case is going to shut a team down for 14 days. It's going to be hard to get a season in that way.

 

[RonJohn]

Regardless of how you may feel about playing/not playing, one thing that really bothers me is knowing the SAs have a finite window to play college football. I'm on the conservative side when it comes to the safety and welfare of anyone, but the one thing that pulls me to say let them play is knowing the impact on the SA's college career. If the season gets cancelled, a quarter of an SA's college career is gone and it will all be beyond their control. Imagine being a senior who spent hundreds if not thousands of hours preparing for your last year, and it doesn't happen. We've got guys like Jalen Camp and Jahaziel Lee who were injured last season and worked their way back so they can have one last run to play for GT and be with their teammates...but they might not even get that chance.

Very few SAs get the chance to play at the next level, and college will be their last opportunity. To have that taken away or cut short because of something beyond their control just sucks all around.

I don't think there is very much this year that hasn't sucked all around. There are a lot of things that have happened to people medically and economically that are much worse than missing a year of eligibility for college athletics.

 

[smokey_wasp]

I actually have a fair amount of confidence they will take care of kids in terms of eligibility in the event the season is canceled entirely.

I think about someone like Antonneus Clayton who basically has one more shot to prove himself and I think the worst thing that could happen is we play like a half season and it has to get shut down. It would be much better for someone like him to get a full season in, regardless of when.