Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

Will the BIG10 Reverse Their Decision?

Pseudonym said:
Does nobody remember January, Feburary when this thing first came on the scene? The lockdowns were temporary to "flatten the curve" to make sure we had enough medicines, ventilators and PPE equipment. But it was made clear, unless an effective vaccine came to market--we would never get rid of this virus. In fact, I remember distinctly at a press conference Dr Birx saying they expected as high as 60-70% of Americans would get infected.

Somehow we've lost the hard cold reality of this virus. Nature is a *****--we're going to have to learn how to live with it.
Click to expand...

I don't recall an order in January or February to work on flattening the curve. It was being played off by plenty though.

Lockdowns didn't happen then, and there was a shortage of PPEs etc. when they did happen and there was never really a plan.

Either way the message should have been to take precautions one way or another by doing X,Y, and Z while we learn more and find out what we CAN do.

Perhaps if that message is stronger and clearer, we're talking about all or most college football teams deciding to operate and other things.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Statefan10
  • Agree
Reactions: Acylum
farminclone said:
Isn’t positivity rate a horrible metric to use? I assume it’s simply the positivity rate of people who were tested on that day. If that’s the case it’s a flawed ratio because there is zero science or math behind the denominator.

We should be measuring cases and deaths per capita and that’s it.
Click to expand...


Yes, you want a way to find an actual number, you need to do it the way the ISU residence halls did. Test everybody. Basic rate of people between roughly 18-22 is 2.2% or 1 in 50.
 
Acylum said:
Right, I agree those are the reported numbers for that TV station. But the 428 positives can include tests that are 2, 3, or possibly more days old. So you can’t really take the number of reported positives and apply them to one specific day’s testing number. I’m not good at explaining things.
Click to expand...

**** for all we know some of those are from several weeks ago.

The number of reported tests has been on some decline the last few weeks in WI...positive results have been pretty steady.

COVID-19: Wisconsin Data

Get the latest statistics, learn how our data is collected, and more. We monitor the spread of COVID-19 by looking at hospitalizations and virus levels in wastewater treatment facilities.
www.dhs.wisconsin.gov www.dhs.wisconsin.gov

Beer, curds, and COVID. Can't beat it.
 
madguy30 said:
**** for all we know some of those are from several weeks ago.

The number of reported tests has been on some decline the last few weeks in WI...positive results have been pretty steady.

COVID-19: Wisconsin Data

Get the latest statistics, learn how our data is collected, and more. We monitor the spread of COVID-19 by looking at hospitalizations and virus levels in wastewater treatment facilities.
www.dhs.wisconsin.gov www.dhs.wisconsin.gov

Beer, curds, and COVID. Can't beat it.
Click to expand...


I think that is why so many are using seven or fourteen day rolling counts. That way the delayed ones come out in the wash.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: CloniesForLife, VeloClone and madguy30
Cyclad said:
Yesterday’s positivity rate in Iowa was 15.5%.
today, over20%.
at this rate schools will not remain open, and I still think football has very little chance of being played - if anybody cares about people’s health.
Click to expand...
Honestly, being a part of a football team is most likely safer than being someone in the general population. The protocols for testing, rules you must follow and punishments if you don't, the daily care you get from the training staffs, etc.
 
  • Agree
  • Creative
Reactions: isutrevman, BCClone and alarson
Statefan10 said:
Honestly, being a part of a football team is most likely safer than being someone in the general population. The protocols for testing, rules you must follow and punishments if you don't, the daily care you get from the training staffs, etc.
Click to expand...


I don't know any other general population that is semi-weekly testing, daily temp. checks and have medical staff around you daily. I guess a hospital, but thinking outside that rare situation.
 
Statefan10 said:
Honestly, being a part of a football team is most likely safer than being someone in the general population. The protocols for testing, rules you must follow and punishments if you don't, the daily care you get from the training staffs, etc.
Click to expand...
@alarson Wondering why you put creative here.. Do you think you're more safe being an average joe student on campus, or a football player who has to follow strict social distancing rules every day, gets their temperature checked every day, gets tested numerous times per week, and has a medical staff at your beck and call?
 
Statefan10 said:
Honestly, being a part of a football team is most likely safer than being someone in the general population. The protocols for testing, rules you must follow and punishments if you don't, the daily care you get from the training staffs, etc.
Click to expand...
There is certainly some truth in your comments. If the NBA model applied, this would certainly be true. But, as cases continue to rise it will be very hard to isolate athletes in a college environment. I fear that community spread will ultimately impact everybody, including athletes. And Iowas trends are certainly negative. IMO, this will make in class learning very difficult, and football difficult to play, with the winners likely determined by which players are able to play for a given team. Hope I am wrong, but I fail to see how this is going to work. It is like the economy. You must control COVID before things can function in any way resembling normalcy. We are not on that path. I fear football will yet be a victim.
 
  • Like
  • Disagree
Reactions: isutrevman and Statefan10
Cyclad said:
There is certainly some truth in your comments. If the NBA model applied, this would certainly be true. But, as cases continue to rise it will be very hard to isolate athletes in a college environment. I fear that community spread will ultimately impact everybody, including athletes. And Iowas trends are certainly negative. IMO, this will make in class learning very difficult, and football difficult to play, with the winners likely determined by which players are able to play for a given team. Hope I am wrong, but I fail to see how this is going to work. It is like the economy. You must control COVID before things can function in any way resembling normalcy. We are not on that path. I fear football will yet be a victim.
Click to expand...
And I don't think you're saying anything crazy either. I do think though that these football teams are going to be more locked down than some think. Obviously it won't be perfect and even one positive could spread to others, but I think that overall it can be done and done effectively. It's going to take a team effort and in today's world I would love for something to go right for once.

And pertaining to your comment about the healthiest team might win by default, that's very very true. I think a lot of that might be due to the leadership of the team. If you have a group of guys fully buy in, and the testing protocols work, we could get this thing done AND get it done safely (which is what is most important).
 
madguy30 said:
I don't recall an order in January or February to work on flattening the curve. It was being played off by plenty though.

Lockdowns didn't happen then, and there was a shortage of PPEs etc. when they did happen and there was never really a plan.

Either way the message should have been to take precautions one way or another by doing X,Y, and Z while we learn more and find out what we CAN do.

Perhaps if that message is stronger and clearer, we're talking about all or most college football teams deciding to operate and other things.
Click to expand...


I specifically remember Birx and Fauci, and Cuomo,(and the media) focusing on not overwhelming our hospitals in March. The world thought we were gonna have every hospital filled with intubated patients. They wanted Covid to spread as slowly as possible. They never really said anything about keeping it from spreading altogether.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: flander1649, h-man64, kcbob79clone and 3 others
ISUTex said:
I specifically remember Birx and Fauci, and Cuomo,(and the media) focusing on not overwhelming our hospitals in March. The world thought we were gonna have every hospital filled with intubated patients. They wanted Covid to spread as slowly as possible. They never really said anything about keeping it from spreading altogether.
Click to expand...


That was mid to later march. My family had tickets to fly to NY on march 13th and the NY city mayor and Cuomo were both saying that everything was fine as long as people stayed under such and such street/avenue (96th or something). Said the subway system was a safe mode of travel since they were 10% lighter ridership than normal. We cancelled out and about 3-7 days later is when it went crazy.
 
ISUTex said:
I specifically remember Birx and Fauci, and Cuomo,(and the media) focusing on not overwhelming our hospitals in March. The world thought we were gonna have every hospital filled with intubated patients. They wanted Covid to spread as slowly as possible. They never really said anything about keeping it from spreading altogether.
Click to expand...

Yep, and the post I quoted said January and February.

I never said we were trying to keep it from spreading altogether.
 
Statefan10 said:
@alarson Wondering why you put creative here.. Do you think you're more safe being an average joe student on campus, or a football player who has to follow strict social distancing rules every day, gets their temperature checked every day, gets tested numerous times per week, and has a medical staff at your beck and call?
Click to expand...

Because its just farcical to think that its safer. Football only adds risk, it does not reduce it. Massively wishful thinking to assume otherwise. The things you discuss are ways to lessen that added risk, but it still remains an added risk.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: kcbob79clone and isutrevman
ISUTex said:
I specifically remember Birx and Fauci, and Cuomo,(and the media) focusing on not overwhelming our hospitals in March. The world thought we were gonna have every hospital filled with intubated patients. They wanted Covid to spread as slowly as possible. They never really said anything about keeping it from spreading altogether.
Click to expand...

We've also learned a lot since then. Back then we were pretty much looking at things in terms of keeping people from dying, but then over time we learned that there can be significant long-term effects from this. We also saw the example of numerous other countries (and even some regions within the united states) that were able to stamp this down to levels to where the threat level was much, much lower, and thus the risk of it taking off uncontrolled again was much lower. You can't just 'flatten' things at a level where things are primed to go out of control very quickly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom