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

LibertyTurns

Banned
Messages
6,216
I am ashamed that we are treating foreign students this way. They should be allowed to stay until this virus and college operations normalize.

On behalf of myself, I apologize for the actions of my country.

Have we no decency?
If classes are ONLY online, how can you tell if the student is in a GT dorm or a room in Italy for example? There’s ZERO difference where you’re online at. If there’s ANY academic activity that’s not online, ie lab work, internship, a single class out of 6 they’re taking, etc an international student gets to stay. What exactly is the issue here?
 

mtodd30

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
846
The issue with sending the international students away is if classes end up online in the middle of the semester. Many countries have already enacted travel bans on the US, just as we have with other countries. It makes sense, it’s a pandemic, it needs to be done.

If that decision is made in September with an uptick in cases, international students may be left with nowhere to go and would be in violation of immigration policies.

It might make sense to keep international students from coming into the country if colleges are online anyway, if they decide to go online before the semester starts. But once they’re here, they’ll either be stuck (due to travel bans) in violation of US law, or might have to pay lots of money in lost rent and changing plane tickets to go home to their country and risk spreading the virus further.

Or if their country in in worse shape than the US (IE Brazil, where one of my active fraternity brothers is from), they could potentially be in much more danger.

To bring it back to football, Sylvain Yondjouen might be stuck in the US, seeing as the EU is putting travel bans in place for the US. I’m not sure whether that applies to Belgian nationals like Sylvain, but if things get worse worldwide it is a possibility.

TLDR, I don’t see why we should send international students home in the event of online classes. That’s 1,000,000 students who contribute billions of dollars to local college towns’ economies (who are probably hurting really badly due to the virus). If they’re already here, we should let them have the option to stay when they’ve already paid rent and are taking legitimate online schedules
 

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,390
Really interesting tact schools are starting to take. Instead of saying X number of football players or basketball players tested positive for Covid, they are now lumping everyone together and saying "X number of SAs tested positive out of YYY number of tests".



Makes you wonder if the NCAA got on a call with all the schools on the new way to approach this so they can keep heat off of college football and the blowback of football players testing positive.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,048
Ivy League announced no fall sports.

UNC just paused on campus workouts for at least a week.

Chances of football this fall are looking lower.
 

RamblinRed

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
5,901
The P5 conferences will decide what happens with college football. They will make the decisions whether they will play at all, whether they will play if not all the schools can play, when they will stop. The NCAA has no control over college football, hasn't for years - that is arguably one thing that is difficult with this for college football is there is no centralized individual or body to make the decision.

College Football is controlled by the P5 Commissioners and the Notre Dame AD. Those 6 will make the decisions. They reportedly talk to each other every day.
They will wait until the last possible day to make any decisions especially if it means postponing the season.

Ohio St joined UNC tonight as a school that has suspended campus workouts due to positive tests. OSU has suspended workouts for all sports, not just football.

I also don't think there has been any overreaction, i'd argue there was an under reaction and that is why college football is at risk.

Deaths bottomed out last week - 7 day avg was flat from Tues--Fri. It declined over the weekend due to it being a Holiday and alot of numbers not being reported. 7 day avg deaths have increased for the first time since April the last 2 days. Hopefully it starts to flatten again, it should some, but the 7 day avg today is more than 20 higher than it was on Friday. The long range models have been forecasting for weeks that the deaths would bottom out the first week of July and then start slowly increasing through August. We'll have to see if the last couple of days is the start of that or not, too soon to tell.
 
Last edited:

bke1984

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,606
Why wouldn’t the NCAA or individual conferences be able to prevent teams from playing? I mean, if schools wanted to separate themselves from the NCAA or their conferences and create their own sanctioned leagues they’d be more than welcome. But if the NCAA or ACC says they won’t sponsor fall sports, and schools play anyway, not only will the games be essentially meaningless, they would also be subject to penalties from their organizations. The NCAA can’t technically stop teams from practicing during dead weeks, or having more full contact practices than the rules allow, but teams that do those things would be subject to penalties should the NCAA find out.

If the P5 want to break off from the NCAA and play games anyway, they can do that. But in this time of uncertainty, I highly doubt that would happen in the very short time frame that those decisions would have to be made.
Penalties? Like what?

It’s real simple. Nothing is worse to these programs than the absence of football. The majority will go bankrupt. It’s that simple. So let’s say a conference decides to cancel football, but half the schools say to hell with that and play anyways. What’s the conference going to do? Fine them? Ban them from playing next year? Yeah, that’s worse than a year without football revenue...

Give me a break man. The schools ARE the brand in college football. The NCAA doesn’t matter...the conferences don’t matter. The schools are what drive everything. If they decide to play, they will play and no one is going to stop them. They might not have 12 games, but the ones that decide to play will play. Even with empty stadiums. In fact, maybe empty stadiums make it more important. What if most of football is cancelled, but there are only 10 total games? What do you think the TV ratings would look like on those 10 games?

Stop being so naive. The NCAA and the conferences have very little power...the schools have all the power. Some will play, some won’t. But it isn’t going to be up to anyone but the schools.
 

JacketOff

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,012
Penalties? Like what?

It’s real simple. Nothing is worse to these programs than the absence of football. The majority will go bankrupt. It’s that simple. So let’s say a conference decides to cancel football, but half the schools say to hell with that and play anyways. What’s the conference going to do? Fine them? Ban them from playing next year? Yeah, that’s worse than a year without football revenue...

Give me a break man. The schools ARE the brand in college football. The NCAA doesn’t matter...the conferences don’t matter. The schools are what drive everything. If they decide to play, they will play and no one is going to stop them. They might not have 12 games, but the ones that decide to play will play. Even with empty stadiums. In fact, maybe empty stadiums make it more important. What if most of football is cancelled, but there are only 10 total games? What do you think the TV ratings would look like on those 10 games?

Stop being so naive. The NCAA and the conferences have very little power...the schools have all the power. Some will play, some won’t. But it isn’t going to be up to anyone but the schools.
Okay, and like I said, if they want to play they can play. The conferences might tell their schools if they want to play have at it, but others may say that if one doesn’t play, nobody plays. The ACC and NCAA cancelled their basketball tournaments last year. Wanna know how many ACC or NCAA basketball games were played after that? Zero. UNC and Duke make all of their money and grow their brands through basketball, so if they were going to take such a huge hit, why didn’t they and the other blue bloods get together and play their own tournament?

Again, like I said if schools want to go out on their own and play nobody is going to stop them. But it’s going to create a ton of bad blood between them and the conference if the conference says they don’t want anybody to play. Obviously the schools are the brands, but they aren’t the legislators. Can they create a new legislation if they choose to? Sure. But that’s going to require a lot of work and a ton of cooperation between different schools that they currently don’t have to worry about.

If say, 3-4 teams in each of the P5 conferences say they won’t play football it will throw off the TV deals and the total money pool throughout the rest of the conference. Then, the individual conferences will have to decide how the conference money pools will be divided. Will the schools that didn’t participate get their full share? Part of it? None of it? How will that affect their relationship with the schools that did play? If schools play without the blessing of their member conferences, how would TV deals even work? Would they be able to negotiate their own deals for every game they decide to play? I never said schools didn’t have the final say. But conferences and the NCAA as a whole have a lot more say and power than you are acting like simply because the money comes from the conference, and not the individual schools.
 

stech81

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,961
Location
Woodstock Georgia
Penalties? Like what?

It’s real simple. Nothing is worse to these programs than the absence of football. The majority will go bankrupt. It’s that simple. So let’s say a conference decides to cancel football, but half the schools say to hell with that and play anyways. What’s the conference going to do? Fine them? Ban them from playing next year? Yeah, that’s worse than a year without football revenue...

Give me a break man. The schools ARE the brand in college football. The NCAA doesn’t matter...the conferences don’t matter. The schools are what drive everything. If they decide to play, they will play and no one is going to stop them. They might not have 12 games, but the ones that decide to play will play. Even with empty stadiums. In fact, maybe empty stadiums make it more important. What if most of football is cancelled, but there are only 10 total games? What do you think the TV ratings would look like on those 10 games?

Stop being so naive. The NCAA and the conferences have very little power...the schools have all the power. Some will play, some won’t. But it isn’t going to be up to anyone but the schools.
First I have no idea what I'm about to say is true maybe someone else does . Lets say the ACC and SEC conferences do say no football. but the school decide to play . who is the TV contracts with , the conferences ? or the teams ? who gets the money ? And if it's the conferences and you can't fill the stadium and no team gets any TV money would it be a good idea to still play ?
 

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,145
The only thing I feel confident in is that sports are not going to be nice and smooth in getting back to action.
The MLS has already had one team knocked out of their bubble before they even began and they may be close to losing a second team (Nashville).
MLB has had issues with getting testing done since day 1.

I am starting to have a concern about sports that I didn't have 3 weeks ago and that is testing. All of the returns - both professional and otherwise are predicated on having testing. Now we are getting to a point that we are starting to see supply chain breakdowns with areas running out of tests, running out of chemicals, both LabCorp and Quest in the last week have said their testing time has doubled due to having to process so many. No one expected the availability of testing to be an issue at this point (because no one expected the country to be in as bad a place as it is right now), but if it becomes more of a problem where leagues have a hard time getting their testing done (or if it is perceived their tests are being prioritized over other citizens) that could become a real issue to playing.

Stanford cut 11 sports today
https://www.cbssports.com/general/n...epartment-due-to-limited-financial-resources/
that tells us that these schools are going to try everything they can to play as much college football as they can get in. They need the money for their athletic programs. What we don't know is whether the situation is going to deteriorate to where that simply isn't a possibility or maybe it gets better and it is ok.
An ESPN article from last night had a quote from one of the conference commissioners that if colleges go to online this fall it is unlikely there will be sports so watching the decisions college make on bringing students back to campus will be important.
Good post, but I would make this caveat.

Most of the college football programs in the country don't make money. The main ones that do - and not all of them make a whole lot - are the P5 programs. And, of course, the programs at Div 3 schools are a substantial burden on the institutions involved. The TV revenues are all that keep most programs afloat. Now, think about this from the standpoint of most schools with football programs. Remember that they now have their financial backs to the wall and every extra expense is a burden. Then give them an excuse for deep sixing their athletic programs for a year: the virus. What would you choose?

And, yes, I know that many programs at the bigger schools are essentially independent corporations that are allied with the schools involved. But those corporations - or associations, if you please - can't run their programs without cooperation from the schools. I am increasingly of the opinion that they won't get it.
 

WreckinGT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,196
Penalties? Like what?

It’s real simple. Nothing is worse to these programs than the absence of football. The majority will go bankrupt. It’s that simple. So let’s say a conference decides to cancel football, but half the schools say to hell with that and play anyways. What’s the conference going to do? Fine them? Ban them from playing next year? Yeah, that’s worse than a year without football revenue...

Give me a break man. The schools ARE the brand in college football. The NCAA doesn’t matter...the conferences don’t matter. The schools are what drive everything. If they decide to play, they will play and no one is going to stop them. They might not have 12 games, but the ones that decide to play will play. Even with empty stadiums. In fact, maybe empty stadiums make it more important. What if most of football is cancelled, but there are only 10 total games? What do you think the TV ratings would look like on those 10 games?

Stop being so naive. The NCAA and the conferences have very little power...the schools have all the power. Some will play, some won’t. But it isn’t going to be up to anyone but the schools.
The ACC has a grant of rights signed by all members and therefore has control over all TV contracts for all of its members. That’s a good bit of power.
 

Buzztheirazz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,445
Stop being so naive. The NCAA and the conferences have very little power...the schools have all the power. Some will play, some won’t. But it isn’t going to be up to anyone but the schools.
This is a hypothetical but bear with me: If there is no classes at the school and you have a player that is interacting with the team>catches Covid>spreads Covid to a loved one who then dies or does themself...

Don’t you think there is a liability from the school and potentially repercussions? Schools could possibly get them to sign a waiver but if you have 20 players end up infected after being on a schools bus/plane there going to be kickback and other serious issues.
 

chewybaka

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
910
Is Notre Dame considered a non conference foe?

And how about this idea, only season ticket holders can attend games (stinger mobile pass is a season ticket). No single game tickets. No game day sales. Only recruits and families will be allowed to enter without season tickets.
I like this scenario because it's a path where I selfishly am allowed to attend...
 

RamblinRed

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
5,901
FWIW, the Baltimore Ravens announced that the maximum attendance at MT Bank stadium this upcoming season will be 14,000 (in a 71,000 seat stadium).
They also said that the potential exists that no fans might be allowed.
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...t-what-nfl-attendance-will-look-like-in-2020/
Chiefs and Packers have also announced that stadium attendance will be significantly reduced if it is allowed at all but haven't publicly announced what the capacity will be.
https://www.chiefs.com/news/chiefs-announce-season-ticket-member-plan-for-the-2020-season
 

ncjacket79

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,237
Penalties? Like what?

It’s real simple. Nothing is worse to these programs than the absence of football. The majority will go bankrupt. It’s that simple. So let’s say a conference decides to cancel football, but half the schools say to hell with that and play anyways. What’s the conference going to do? Fine them? Ban them from playing next year? Yeah, that’s worse than a year without football revenue...

Give me a break man. The schools ARE the brand in college football. The NCAA doesn’t matter...the conferences don’t matter. The schools are what drive everything. If they decide to play, they will play and no one is going to stop them. They might not have 12 games, but the ones that decide to play will play. Even with empty stadiums. In fact, maybe empty stadiums make it more important. What if most of football is cancelled, but there are only 10 total games? What do you think the TV ratings would look like on those 10 games?

Stop being so naive. The NCAA and the conferences have very little power...the schools have all the power. Some will play, some won’t. But it isn’t going to be up to anyone but the schools.
Ridiculous. If two schools decide to play some sort of scrimmage how do you think that will happen? Players are just going to say “okay, I’ll
risk injury in a game that means nothing, that won’t be televised (grant of rights), with make believe refs, and is not sanctioned (could jeopardize eligibility). Sure sign me up.” Get real man this will come down to the P5 schools making a decision.
 
Last edited:

RamblinRed

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
5,901
The TV contracts are with the conferences not with the schools. All the TV money is distributed to the conference and then the conference distributes the money to the schools based on whatever agreements they have with the schools (which in the case of all the conferences is equal payments to all conference members).

There is a range of decisions that could be made and what is chosen won't be known for 3-4 weeks.
Things could get better and everything could be a go for all teams (with limited fan capacity).
Things could get worse and it could all get cancelled.
Things could stay similar to now and a conference decides to allow schools to make decisions on whether to play based on their local conditions. If this is the decision then any money received by the conference would be divied up equally among all the schools regardless of whether they played or not.

With the Ravens, Chiefs and Packers all announcing yesterday that if any fans are allowed this season at all (a decision yet to be made) then it will be in significantly reduced numbers (Ravens said max capacity will be 14,000 in a 71,000 seat stadium) I think the idea of their being any significant number of fans at games is starting to fade.
 

stech81

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,961
Location
Woodstock Georgia
FWIW, the Baltimore Ravens announced that the maximum attendance at MT Bank stadium this upcoming season will be 14,000 (in a 71,000 seat stadium).
They also said that the potential exists that no fans might be allowed.
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...t-what-nfl-attendance-will-look-like-in-2020/
Chiefs and Packers have also announced that stadium attendance will be significantly reduced if it is allowed at all but haven't publicly announced what the capacity will be.
https://www.chiefs.com/news/chiefs-announce-season-ticket-member-plan-for-the-2020-season
If we do this it would mean 11,000 at the games. ( kind of like the early 80's for those that remember but it was about 20,000 then but we had more seats ) . Just a guess we know they will go by A-T points . Just a guess lets say the avg person gets 3 season tickets some most some less, I would guess they players would get 2 tickets per game. So if i'm right I would guess if you look and your points are under 3500 you would by ok. And I sure those that could some will opt out not to go. Guess we will know by the end of they month.
 
Top