Skip to main content

Has not been cancelled. The meeting last night was regarding the financial health of the conference. There was a preliminary vote about possibly canceling the season. No coaches or ADs were in attendance for their feedback.

The meeting this evening supposedly will be attended by Big 10 coaches and ADs.

Kirk Herbstreet, my go to guy,  has announced that probably more time is needed to prepare and teams looking to delay the start of the season. 

This obviously takes pressure off of everyone.  I am sure that coaches are having discussions with their teams today. 

Some players across the board have opted out and 1 player has experienced heart issues due to the virus, and his mom spoke out over the weekend, which may have set off panic. As well as the MAC cancelling their season.

I read that CUSA conference games were cancelled.  That is NOT true. 

 

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

The Big10 Commissioner has been very outspoken in his opposition to playing in the fall.  The Big10s approach has been equivalent to the NCAAs.  Panic and inconsistency have been the Big10 mode of operation and I think you can look squarely at the leadership in that conference and individual schools.

So today, I think some of the coaches are speaking out because they are a lot closer to canceling than other P5 conferences, and they do not have the financial fragility of the MAC.

The MAC has been a disaster from the beginning.  They had schools tossing out programs (CMU, BG, Akron, etc,) back in May.  They canceled Spring championships for the next 4 years back in May!  They clearly were in financial dire straights and looking for an excuse to make cuts.  Hello Covid.   But they didn't expect the P5 to sweep the rug out from underneath them and take away all their revenue generating games.  Now football would be a financial loser in 2020 also.  So, time to cancel everything.

The SEC and the ACC, well there just not quite ready to throw the baby out with the bath water.  They are being far more pragmatic than idealistic.    They are saying. "Look, cases are going down, fatalities are going down, why are we making a decision now."  Let's give it another couple weeks.  Very pragmatic.

https://www.aseaofblue.com/202...-sec-acc-season-2020

It seems that there may be longer term effects of COVID, including myocarditis, that can take weeks to months to recover from.  So I suspect the Presidents are trying to be the "adult in the room" and acknowledge that college sports, although important, are not worth putting young people's health at stake.  There will be tens of thousands of "normal" students on campus, so maybe that is hypocritical.  I am not saying I agree or disagree, but there does not seem to be much upside (beyond $$s) for the athletic conferences to allow sports to happen in this environment, with student athletes who are not paid professionals.  As much as we love college sports, they are not as essential as education.  Sorry I thought I was not going to get into any COVID discussion!!  Btw, this affects my daughter, who is on her last year of DI volleyball - she likely will never play "competitively" again, and that sucks.  I do at least understand the likely reason the Presidents are making this decision though.  Don't necessarily agree.  But just trying to be objective, there's not a big upside other than revenue.  And these big institutions don't want to be accused of putting revenue ahead of young people's health?

 

The Case Fatality Rate of Covid-19 in people under the age of 65 is 0.09%.  That is a fact.  Anyone that has seen my posts knows that I tend to deal in facts.  Of that case fatality rate in persons under the age of 65, the 90% have known underlying conditions.  This is also fact.  If we assume the 130 D1 football teams have 120 players on average that is about 15,600 players.  If we assume the coaches staff and trainers closely involved with these players on a day-to day basis brings the total to about 20,000 individuals under age 65 with near 80% being under age 30.

If everyone of them gets infected, we are talking about a predictive value of 1.8 deaths.  Everyone of them won't get infected and many already have been. Why am I putting this here.  Because this would be my message to the MAC, the PAC, and the Big10:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2LZrmIxCCw

Last edited by Pedaldad
@Pedaldad posted:

The Case Fatality Rate of Covid-19 in people under the age of 65 is 0.09%.  That is a fact.  Anyone that has seen my posts knows that I tend to deal in facts.  Of that case fatality rate in persons under the age of 65, the 90% have known underlying conditions.  This is also fact.  If we assume the 130 D1 football teams have 120 players on average that is about 15,600 players.  If we assume the coaches staff and trainers closely involved with these players on a day-to day basis brings the total to about 20,000 individuals under age 65 with near 80% being under age 30.

If everyone of them gets infected, we are talking about a predictive value of 1.8 deaths.  Everyone of them won't get infected and many already have been. Why am I putting this here.  Because this would be my message to the MAC, the PAC, and the Big10:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2LZrmIxCCw

That made me laugh. Good one

@Pedaldad posted:

The Case Fatality Rate of Covid-19 in people under the age of 65 is 0.09%.  That is a fact.  Anyone that has seen my posts knows that I tend to deal in facts.  Of that case fatality rate in persons under the age of 65, the 90% have known underlying conditions.  This is also fact.  If we assume the 130 D1 football teams have 120 players on average that is about 15,600 players.  If we assume the coaches staff and trainers closely involved with these players on a day-to day basis brings the total to about 20,000 individuals under age 65 with near 80% being under age 30.

If everyone of them gets infected, we are talking about a predictive value of 1.8 deaths.  Everyone of them won't get infected and many already have been. Why am I putting this here.  Because this would be my message to the MAC, the PAC, and the Big10:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2LZrmIxCCw

It only takes one or two deaths or bad cases to spur a big lawsuit, though, that they don't want to deal with. 

One thing I brought up to our University President the other day is that having home football games is a good way to keep kids on campus, so they don't go home and infect more vulnerable people.  However, if that happens, who is liable?  Not so much the University, as students are told to (but not forced) stay on campus through it.  IMO, a lot of this is driven by liability.

@Viking0 posted:

It only takes one or two deaths or bad cases to spur a big lawsuit, though, that they don't want to deal with. 

One thing I brought up to our University President the other day is that having home football games is a good way to keep kids on campus, so they don't go home and infect more vulnerable people.  However, if that happens, who is liable?  Not so much the University, as students are told to (but not forced) stay on campus through it.  IMO, a lot of this is driven by liability.

Agree with the fear of liability being the driving force here.  Several months ago I wrote on this forum that I finally appreciated FDR’s “The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself.”

I hope CUSA, the Sun Belt, The Big12, SEC, and ACC, the academies, etc. all stick to their current strategies and play.   I hope we pay attention to what this does to the PAC and Big 10 for the next decade,   So we never make this stupid mistake again.

Not getting a lot of news coverage, but "Former Florida State [basketball] center Michael Ojo died on Friday after collapsing during training in Serbia, his former team Red Star Belgrade said. He was 27. . . . Ojo was reported to have tested positive for the coronavirus, but also that he had recovered. Local media reported that he died of a heart attack."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/m...-center-dies-age-27/

@Pedaldad posted:

Agree with the fear of liability being the driving force here.  Several months ago I wrote on this forum that I finally appreciated FDR’s “The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself.”

I hope CUSA, the Sun Belt, The Big12, SEC, and ACC, the academies, etc. all stick to their current strategies and play.   I hope we pay attention to what this does to the PAC and Big 10 for the next decade,   So we never make this stupid mistake again.

Sun Belt is going for it. At this point it’s “damn the torpedos”. 

Really sad for these kids.  I know a lot of P5 football players and they all want to play.  Our friend that is a likely first round pick from the BIG10 is devastated.  Whole family is.  The protocols in place would keep them much safer than 80 guys just hanging out without the protocols.  If they played they would have had trackers to hold them accountable, would have been tested 3X a week, would have had heart scans if they tested positive before returning to play.  Now we have a bunch of pissed off kids who will just be out partying.  Its a joke and its not what's best for the kids, just what's best for the attorneys.

Last edited by baseballhs
@TPM posted:

https://www.espn.com/college-f...oup-address-concerns

So did the Pac 12 and Big 10 cancel over concerns of COVID, or over concerns that they couldn't deliver what the players wanted? 

 

I think the number of players making demands was small, and most prefer just to play, but that is interesting. 

Going forward, it will be interesting to see what players are able to do if the conferences that plan to play go forward.  As I read on another forum, I'm 99% certain Justin Fields could return to the SEC if he wanted.  But I'm 99.9% certain he has played his last down of College Football.

The NCAA football portal is about to explode with talent.  Will conferences come up with their own rules for transfers and rosters this year?  What authority does the NCAA really have in this situation?  I think precedents they set in the Spring and losing half the FBS just made it the wild wild west.

@Pedaldad posted:

I think the number of players making demands was small, and most prefer just to play, but that is interesting. 

Going forward, it will be interesting to see what players are able to do if the conferences that plan to play go forward.  As I read on another forum, I'm 99% certain Justin Fields could return to the SEC if he wanted.  But I'm 99.9% certain he has played his last down of College Football.

The NCAA football portal is about to explode with talent.  Will conferences come up with their own rules for transfers and rosters this year?  What authority does the NCAA really have in this situation?  I think precedents they set in the Spring and losing half the FBS just made it the wild wild west.

 Very interesting. 

Sorry if this was already discussed in other threads but I can't find it mentioned. The NCAA is granting an extra year of eligibility for student athletes that have their season canceled just like for Spring athletes.  The impact here will be a little different as some P5 are playing football and other sports.  Just more pain for high school athletes.  I would have thought with the carnage they created for sping athletes that they might have learned their lesson and possibly gone in a different direction.

The Council recommended the board provide fall sport student-athletes who compete and then opt out of future participation or have a season cut short due to COVID-19: (1) an extension of their five-year period of eligibility; and (2) an additional season of competition if they participate in 50% or less of the maximum number of competitions allowed in each sport by Division I rules.

FWIW.  The JAMA article that the wimpy10 and pathetic12 based their decisions on, citing too many unknowns related to Covid-19 and long term effects of myocarditis has been retracted.  It was extraordinarily flawed and inaccurate.  Many medical professionals pointed this out weeks ago.  But hey, the cowardly10 were going with the science.    I have hated(and I don't use the word hate lightly) the medical profession's (my profession) willingness to publish and produce articles that support their opinion rather than doing the studies first and then forming an educated assessment of their data.   This is a microcosmic sample of the terrible decisions that have been made for 6 months.

It is no wonder the public and politicians have a hard time sorting through the pile of raw sewage that is medical research to find any single gem of information that passed through the bowels of our institutions of higher learning.   Still Kevin Warren must have known something.  After all,  his son never opted-out at Miss St.  

Last edited by Pedaldad

Where?  Can you give us a citation?

https://jamanetwork.com/journa.../fullarticle/2770026

Here are the important lines from the retraction:

There were no differences between those with COVID-19 and the risk factor–matched patients.

However, only the comparison for left ventricular mass index between those with COVID-19 and healthy controls changed from a significant to a nonsignificant association.

However, the corrected findings no longer show higher left ventricular mass in these patients. 

 

@RoadRunner posted:

This is not a research article, but issues with the JAMA article are review by medical professionals. 

Destruction of our athletic institutions is just one of the many casualties created by bad science in this pandemic.   Unfortunately,  many of our medical professionals have been complicit in bad science.  It is unfair to our politicians and general public to hold them solely accountable.  But we would be much better served by common sense than " the science". 

One of my all time favorites, George Carlin, sharing a little common sense and describing our ridiculous Covid -19 response two decades before it happened.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X29lF43mUlo

I find it disappointing that some people in this forum and nationwide are applying the “bad science” term to anything that turns out to be incorrect re: COVID-19.

Science, by definition, is constantly testing & proving/disproving theories/findings. That’s one of the key fundamentals that separate science from faith/religion. what separates  When a finding is shown by new research/evidence to be wrong, and practices change, that’s “good science” at work. Calling it otherwise is a disincentive to advancing knowledge, and is part of what hinders human advancement. 

 

@Senna posted:

I find it disappointing that some people in this forum and nationwide are applying the “bad science” term to anything that turns out to be incorrect re: COVID-19.

Science, by definition, is constantly testing & proving/disproving theories/findings. That’s one of the key fundamentals that separate science from faith/religion. what separates  When a finding is shown by new research/evidence to be wrong, and practices change, that’s “good science” at work. Calling it otherwise is a disincentive to advancing knowledge, and is part of what hinders human advancement. 

 

Based on this response, I can tell that you did not read the articles😔

@@Roadrunner I did, actually. And the final paragraph is pretty much what solidifies it for me:

”Murthy is a leading expert in the field, and he is not convinced that the JAMA study is conclusive or even entirely accurate and therefore cannot be used as a legitimate, authoritative review of COVID-19 and myocarditis.”

So it’s good science. The Frankfurt study was done. Dr Murthy has pointed out flaws in it. With luck, new studies will take place and find that the JAMA article was right, Dr Murthy was right, or (most likely) it’s somewhere in the middle. And we will keep learning. 

If the Frankfurt study turns out to be fixed (like the Wakefield MMR study), then this case will indeed be bad science. But until then, it’s, at worst, science. 

Or did I miss the part where Soros fixed the results?

@Pedaldad posted:

????

I'm confused, are you stating that you hope new studies will confirm long-term, potentially fatal myocarditis as a complication of Covid?  I hope not. 

As a strawman? No. Thanks for playing. 

But if you’re asking if I’d rather have knowledge or not? I choose knowledge., no matter how displeasing. I’d love to know whether our young athletes are at risk for XX, YY, or ZZ complication from this.  Informed decisions come from that. 

No small part of our decision to reduce our son’s exposure by having him do digital learning is due to a small but not insignificant family history (mother, uncle, grandfather) of congenital heart issues that have not turned up until later in life. 

I hope everyone understands that I’m not just battlIng here to be right on a forum that nobody really gives a f**k about. Believe me, I want nothing more than my (schoolteacher) wife and (HS) children roll go back to their lives circa January 2020. I’m just trying to do my part to help people make informed decisions based on the best, most valid knowledge available at the time. And sometimes those are based on an abundance of caution. The best part of that? More people are often alive to say “You were wrong”. 

@Senna posted:

As a strawman? No. Thanks for playing. 

But if you’re asking if I’d rather have knowledge or not? I choose knowledge., no matter how displeasing. I’d love to know whether our young athletes are at risk for XX, YY, or ZZ complication from this.  Informed decisions come from that. 

No small part of our decision to reduce our son’s exposure by having him do digital learning is due to a small but not insignificant family history (mother, uncle, grandfather) of congenital heart issues that have not turned up until later in life. 

I hope everyone understands that I’m not just battlIng here to be right on a forum that nobody really gives a f**k about. Believe me, I want nothing more than my (schoolteacher) wife and (HS) children roll go back to their lives circa January 2020. I’m just trying to do my part to help people make informed decisions based on the best, most valid knowledge available at the time. And sometimes those are based on an abundance of caution. The best part of that? More people are often alive to say “You were wrong”. 

You should know that less than 0.2% of Covid deaths have occurred to those 24 or younger, or about 300.  During that time more kids that age have died of suicide, cancer and many other causes.  The over-reaction to the dangers of Covid to those under 80 has been massive.

@Smitty28 posted:

You should know that less than 0.2% of Covid deaths have occurred to those 24 or younger, or about 300.  During that time more kids that age have died of suicide, cancer and many other causes.  The over-reaction to the dangers of Covid to those under 80 has been massive.

Smitty, don't let the facts get in he way of a liberals fears. November 3 he will no longer be afraid. 

and I believe the 0.2 rate is actually falling but again details details 

@RoadRunner posted:

Based on this response, I can tell that you did not read the articles😔

The JAMA correction includes this as its final paragraph:

"We are pleased to confirm that reanalysis of the data has not led to a change in the main conclusions of the study. As we originally reported, compared with healthy controls and risk factor–matched controls, patients recently recovered from COVID-19 had lower left ventricular ejection fraction, higher left ventricle volume, and elevated values of T1 and T2. However, the corrected findings no longer show higher left ventricular mass in these patients. We confirm that there are no other errors."

I agree that they made mistakes, and it is inexcusable that JAMA published the original article.  However, at least when the mistakes were pointed out, the authors did a re-analysis, and publicly said what they had done wrong, and what happened when they corrected it.

Whether this was the piece that convinced the Big 10 to cancel is an interesting question, and I do entirely agree that the Big 10 should have explained very clearly what their rationale was.  I also wonder whether the commissioner was to blame, or whether he was getting a lot of pressure from the college presidents, who are worried about more things than just sports.

 

Whether this was the piece that convinced the Big 10 to cancel is an interesting question, and I do entirely agree that the Big 10 should have explained very clearly what their rationale was.  I also wonder whether the commissioner was to blame, or whether he was getting a lot of pressure from the college presidents, who are worried about more things than just sports.

I was going to post this point earlier too.   It felt like to me that they made the decision to cancel football, then there was outrage and the next day they pointed out myocarditis as one of the reasons.  It felt like a cover story but they really might have considered it.  I believe parents are asking for meeting notes/minutes of the B10 "vote" meeting and how they came to the conclusion but the B10 is resisting.  It's one big mess.  

I was going to post this point earlier too.   It felt like to me that they made the decision to cancel football, then there was outrage and the next day they pointed out myocarditis as one of the reasons.  It felt like a cover story but they really might have considered it.  I believe parents are asking for meeting notes/minutes of the B10 "vote" meeting and how they came to the conclusion but the B10 is resisting.  It's one big mess.  

when you make halfass choices for the wrong reasons and then get called out on them...it is difficult to look good. 

https://www.centredaily.com/sp...rticle245448050.html

During a State College Area school board of directors, Wayne Sebastianelli — Penn State’s director of athletic medicine — made some alarming comments about the link between COVID-19 and myocarditis, particularly in Big Ten athletes. Sebastianelli said that cardiac MRI scans revealed that approximately a third of Big Ten athletes who tested positive for COVID-19 appeared to have myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle that can be fatal if left unchecked.

“When we looked at our COVID-positive athletes, whether they were symptomatic or not, 30 to roughly 35 percent of their heart muscles (are) inflamed,” Sebastianelli said. “And we really just don’t know what to do with it right now. It’s still very early in the infection. Some of that has led to the Pac-12 and the Big Ten’s decision to sort of put a hiatus on what’s happening.”

“You could have a very high-level athlete who’s got a very superior VO2 max and cardiac output who gets infected with COVID and can drop his or her VO2 max and cardiac output just by 10 percent, and that could make them go from elite status to average status,” Sebastianelli said. “We don’t know that. We don’t know how long that’s going to last. What we have seen is when people have been studied with cardiac MRI scans — symptomatic and asymptomatic COVID infections — is a level of inflammation in cardiac muscle that just is alarming.”

Spurs some questions:

  • Have pro athletes been tested for this across the board (MLB/NBA/Big Five)?
  • If so, what's their rate of infection?
  • If pro rate is lower, why? (Relative) youth of the college players?

I wonder if he compared them against the heart MRI's he took when these athletes came to campus like I am sure they do (sarc).  Also real surprising this drops today since the presidents are voting again tomorrow where I would expect them to reverse course and play.

* He has corrected some of that article - he doesn't know how many B10 athletes with Covid had MRI's, admits it wasn't all as stated above and doesn't know the number but still says a third of whatever that number had this condition. 

*Second admits many experts see this finding as incidental and expects athletes to be able to play after it clears up.   

*Myocarditis is a known condition that can be treated.  If the virus causes it in some cases and they won't let players play with Covid then they have the mitigation they need.

 

Last edited by Gunner Mack Jr.

College and pro lineman build themselves up to a point that places strain on their heart. I wonder how much effect COVID has on the heart of a 275-325 pound linemen.

Joe Thomas as a 330 pound All Pro ...

Joe Thomas after getting down to the weight his doctor recommended post retirement ...

Attachments

Images (2)
  • mceclip0
  • mceclip1
@Smitty28 posted:

You should know that less than 0.2% of Covid deaths have occurred to those 24 or younger, or about 300.  During that time more kids that age have died of suicide, cancer and many other causes.  The over-reaction to the dangers of Covid to those under 80 has been massive.

Well, as long as Covid has only killed 300 more kids than would have otherwise died, I guess that's no big deal, then.

It's not like we do anything to stop kids from dying of suicide, or cancer, or many other causes.

I mean everyone who died of Covid was eventually going to die anyway.  Fuck it, let's party.

@jacjacatk posted:

Well, as long as Covid has only killed 300 more kids than would have otherwise died, I guess that's no big deal, then.

It's not like we do anything to stop kids from dying of suicide, or cancer, or many other causes.

I mean everyone who died of Covid was eventually going to die anyway.  Fuck it, let's party.

Why don't you point out every other cause of death for people under the age of 24 and lets put a stop to those actives too.  While your at it, why not stop all activities that could cause death to a person of any age.  Even a single death from any cause is too many, right?

Why do we stop baseball games when we hear thunder?  How many kids would actually be struck by lightning?  Of course, we don't know, because we do stop the games.

Average of 32 fatalities from lightning per year in the US (since 2006), after all.  That's way less than 300.  Oh wait, maybe it's lower because people do take precautions.

Yes because waiting a half hour or playing tomorrow is the same as shutting down the world, growth, education and life in general for a year or more because there is a black cloud in the sky. 

@jacjacatk posted:

Well, as long as Covid has only killed 300 more kids than would have otherwise died, I guess that's no big deal, then.

It's not like we do anything to stop kids from dying of suicide, or cancer, or many other causes.

I mean everyone who died of Covid was eventually going to die anyway.  Fuck it, let's party.

Why do we stop baseball games when we hear thunder?  How many kids would actually be struck by lightning?  Of course, we don't know, because we do stop the games.

Average of 32 fatalities from lightning per year in the US (since 2006), after all.  That's way less than 300.  Oh wait, maybe it's lower because people do take precautions.

More kids will be killed riding their bikes to school this year than by covid or lightning. Do we ban bikes? Maybe just ban in-person school and keep them home, then we don't have to worry about covid or getting hit by a car while riding their bike. Actually, they likely won't be killed by lightning either at home.

"Each year about 100 children are killed and 254,000 are injured as a result of bicycle-related accidents." Although it doesn't say anything about riding to school, as such.

https://www.stanfordchildrens....statistics-90-P02853

Oh wait, don't we require bicycle helmets now?

If you're going to quote numbers, then show us the numbers.  In fact, I agree that the numbers show that children and young adults aren't severely affected by COVID.  However, those kids don't live by themselves, that's the difference between them and young adults/college students. 

My point is simply that we do try to keep people safe when it is possible to do so.  It's all a risk-benefit calculation.  The whole problem with this NEW virus is that the full scale of risks has not been well understood.  The Big Ten's argument seems to be that the risks for athletes getting COVID is still unknown.  Once the other conferences start playing, we will all know what the risks actually are, and the Big Ten will either be shown to have been right, or wrong.  Until that happens, though, it's just speculation.

Back to the B10 - Both the Big 10 and Pac 12 successfully got their cover stories out yesterday.   The B10 with the myocarditis and then the retraction and the P12 with the announcement of rapid covid testing now possible.   Now that the cover stories are out of the way the B10 will vote to play in the fall and start in early October (they have too start this early to get in semifinals) and the P12 will meekly follow them to play.   I would be shocked at any other outcome.

@TPM posted:

Ohio State opened up last week now has about 900 cases.

Football team lives in a bubble so I heard.

Our local D3 opened with everyone required to wear a mask anytime they are out of their dorm rooms, limit gatherings, including the number of people allowed to attend in person classes held inside. Fortunately, we've had great weather and the campus has had many classes outside, in person, with mask with students socially distanced.

Students were required to self isolate and report health symptoms for two weeks before coming to campus. The first weekend several were sent home to self isolate after failing to following COVID requirements. They'll be able to come back in a couple of weeks.

I walk on campus, saw couples sitting and studying together outside, wearing masks. We covered a protest on campus Wednesday where 300 students showed up. I didn't see a single person without a mask. Now townspeople who walk on the campus are wearing masks because we want to support what the college is trying to do.

Two weeks in, they have had 8 positive tests. They hope to soon move to a more relaxed set of protocols that would allow bigger gatherings of students. In the meantime, our two big state schools have almost no protocols and are national leaders in cases of COVID.

It's too soon to declare victory, but I'm really excited by what they've been able to achieve here — and it's a huge financial benefit to our community that relies on the economic impact of these students.

The reluctance to implement or follow safety protocols that work is just incredibly frustrating.

@Smitty28 posted:

Masks for Covid = helmets for bicycles.  And by your own statement kids with helmets still die riding a bike.  Therefore bicycles should be banned.  I get it.

I bike almost any day the weather permits. I bike about 4,000 miles per year. I don’t wear a helmet. I wouldn’t consider not wearing gloves. When you get knocked off a bike you land on your hands. How you roll determines how badly you get hurt.

Despite wearing gloves, last month  I still got three small fractures in my hand, a dislocated finger and badly torn ligaments. It’s the first time I've been dumped (sideswiped or slammed on brakes when cut off and went over handlebars) and injured (versus damn, that hurts a lot).**

Life is about risk. Even the government calculates acceptable death totals. Otherwise the speed limit on interstates would be 15 mph.

** A drawback of being left handed is those are the front brakes. A couple of times I’ve hit the front brakes harder than the back.

@Senna posted:

No small part of our decision to reduce our son’s exposure by having him do digital learning is due to a small but not insignificant family history (mother, uncle, grandfather) of congenital heart issues that have not turned up until later in life.

This is what I find interesting. Not trying to pick on this poster or say they are wrong. But..

So there is a history of a heart issue in the family. Three people in the family tree isn't a lot but it's there. Covid can affect the heart, but so can other illnesses (H1N1). To what extent is debatable and my understanding is it is treatable. So covid affecting the heart now very well may be irrelevant later in life. Keeping all that in mind, putting a percentage of the chances this young man gets this issue, also comes down with covid that affects the heart, and that effect would last latter in life to coincide with the aforementioned ailment, would be difficult. But I would assume the number would be lower than a lot of things people do on a daily, weekly, monthly bases, like say drive a car. Things we don't give a second thought to.

Like I said, not trying to call this poster out. I know a lot of people with this mindset. The perceived threat just doesn't match reality. Drinking kills more people. Or smoking, or hell even Mcdonalds. You have to wear a mask to go to the convenience store to buy cigarettes. There's irony in that.

Too many people in the country are obese. It probably has scared a lot of people during COVID.

I wonder how many people have been scared enough to do something about their health. I’ll bet it’s not many. It will be like the 90% of people who join a health club in January and never see the place by February. 

This is what I find interesting. Not trying to pick on this poster or say they are wrong. But..

So there is a history of a heart issue in the family. Three people in the family tree isn't a lot but it's there. Covid can affect the heart, but so can other illnesses (H1N1). To what extent is debatable and my understanding is it is treatable. So covid affecting the heart now very well may be irrelevant later in life. Keeping all that in mind, putting a percentage of the chances this young man gets this issue, also comes down with covid that affects the heart, and that effect would last latter in life to coincide with the aforementioned ailment, would be difficult. But I would assume the number would be lower than a lot of things people do on a daily, weekly, monthly bases, like say drive a car. Things we don't give a second thought to.

Like I said, not trying to call this poster out. I know a lot of people with this mindset. The perceived threat just doesn't match reality. Drinking kills more people. Or smoking, or hell even Mcdonalds. You have to wear a mask to go to the convenience store to buy cigarettes. There's irony in that.

Uhhh, I'm guessing the concern is probably much more about the son becoming infected and then inadvertently infecting one of the compromised older family members, which is the very valid concern that so many want to gloss over.

@cabbagedad posted:

Uhhh, I'm guessing the concern is probably much more about the son becoming infected and then inadvertently infecting one of the compromised older family members, which is the very valid concern that so many want to gloss over.

Bit of both, really. And the "perceived threat" is still relatively unknown (this virus is still being studied). Erring on the side of caution when the results can be the same either way is a prudent choice.

That said, we have made the decision to shift both of our kids back to in-person, as we're finding that the results aren't going to be the same. Just going to have to adapt as best we can. We're just fortunate we have the choice, and (hopefully) the ability to navigate it safely. Not everyone is so lucky on either front. 

@Senna posted:

Bit of both, really. And the "perceived threat" is still relatively unknown (this virus is still being studied). Erring on the side of caution when the results can be the same either way is a prudent choice.

That said, we have made the decision to shift both of our kids back to in-person, as we're finding that the results aren't going to be the same. Just going to have to adapt as best we can. We're just fortunate we have the choice, and (hopefully) the ability to navigate it safely. Not everyone is so lucky on either front. 

I think one of the things we will learn out of this is how little we know about how to effectively teach online. Our school meets in person from 8 to 1:30, then teachers go to online learners from 1:30 to 3. I really don't understand how the two are supposed to equal out.

Probably a dumb question, but is it possible to rout the back break cable to the left hand and the front to the right hand? 

It could probably be done. But it was a lot easier to loosen the front brake cable. The front brakes still work. 

I should have bought a left handed bike. I really appreciate my left handed screw driver. 😁

@Iowamom23 posted:

I think one of the things we will learn out of this is how little we know about how to effectively teach online. Our school meets in person from 8 to 1:30, then teachers go to online learners from 1:30 to 3. I really don't understand how the two are supposed to equal out.

There are companies that have been doing online and home school K-12 for years. I wonder why so many schools districts are reinventing the wheel instead of consulting with these companies. I’ll bet some of the best teachers in the country have called these companies on their own. The rest of the teachers are probably just doing what their unions tell them. 

It’s why in any field (baseball or teaching for example) there are stars and there are the rest. The stars are those willing to make the extra effort.

I would like to see star teachers paid more rather than the same as a boring stiff who has worked the same number of years and is out the door as soon as the bell rings.

@RJM posted:

 

I would like to see star teachers paid more rather than the same as a boring stiff who has worked the same number of years and is out the door as soon as the bell rings.

I agree, and I think most parents would agree with this.  Unions will haven none of this.  They insist that it is impossible to fairly rate or rank a teacher.  Never mind that most parents know exactly who the best and worst teachers are, and every other industry in America has figured out how to do it.  I suspect the best teachers today in public schools, those who are truly ambitious and willing to go the extra mile, get out of teaching.  Private schools is an entirely different thing.  My kids teachers were on a 1-year contract and were re-evaluated every year.  The best teachers were rock stars, the worst were terminated.

@cabbagedad posted:

Uhhh, I'm guessing the concern is probably much more about the son becoming infected and then inadvertently infecting one of the compromised older family members, which is the very valid concern that so many want to gloss over.

That's not the way they worded their post. And college isn't the only place you can get covid. So, instead of keeping the kid home and letting him interact with an at-risk adult seems the better choice is to send the kid to school and keep them away from said adults. I know from reading your post over the years you know this, but then you post that drivel above. Kinda goes to my point. Is covid something to be concerned about? Yes, I don't think anyone would disagree with that.  But people are letting it cloud their judgment and for most that shouldn't be the case. I don't worry a lot about my son getting covid. I do worry about him driving home down a busy ass highway. I worry about him going out and drinking and maybe driving like I know college-age kids do. I worry about sex and pregnancy. Of the things I worry about that might negatively affect my sons life covid is down the list.

That's not the way they worded their post. And college isn't the only place you can get covid. So, instead of keeping the kid home and letting him interact with an at-risk adult seems the better choice is to send the kid to school and keep them away from said adults. I know from reading your post over the years you know this, but then you post that drivel above. Kinda goes to my point. Is covid something to be concerned about? Yes, I don't think anyone would disagree with that.  But people are letting it cloud their judgment and for most that shouldn't be the case. I don't worry a lot about my son getting covid. I do worry about him driving home down a busy ass highway. I worry about him going out and drinking and maybe driving like I know college-age kids do. I worry about sex and pregnancy. Of the things I worry about that might negatively affect my sons life covid is down the list.

 I think that there is a legitament concern  about bringing COVID home to the family, just as there is a legitament concern for the things you have posted. 

@RJM posted:

There are companies that have been doing online and home school K-12 for years. I wonder why so many schools districts are reinventing the wheel instead of consulting with these companies. I’ll bet some of the best teachers in the country have called these companies on their own. The rest of the teachers are probably just doing what their unions tell them. 

 

If I had a kid in k-12, now, in an unopened district, I would be using an experienced online homeschooling option. There’s no way I’m having my tax dollars go to our local school district that isn’t open. 


My guess is the reason the experienced companies are not helping is competition.  Why help your competitors?

@Senna posted:

As husband of a woman who has over 20 years of experience in elementary education (well over half at Title 1 facilities), holds an Ed, and is an instruction coach for her school, I find the general lack of appreciation for educators expressed in these recent posts to be very disappointing. 

As a former teacher, I agree.  

 

@RoadRunner posted:

If I had a kid in k-12, now, in an unopened district, I would be using an experienced online homeschooling option. There’s no way I’m having my tax dollars go to our local school district that isn’t open. 


My guess is the reason the experienced companies are not helping is competition.  Why help your competitors?

Your tax dollars go to public education regardless of whether your kid is enrolled, right?

@Senna posted:

As husband of a woman who has over 20 years of experience in elementary education (well over half at Title 1 facilities), holds an EdD, and is an instruction coach for her school, I find the general lack of appreciation for educators expressed in these recent posts to be very disappointing. 

I have a lot of appreciation for the best teachers my kids had. There were a handful I believe should have been at the bottom of the pay scale due to their lack of ability or lack of desire to do more than the minimum.

My son asked one teacher for extra help. She told him to tell his parents to get him a tutor.  

@Iowamom23 posted:

So I'm now curious--and maybe this should be a different thread--there seems to be a lot of crankiness with teachers unions. What do people think of players unions? 

I’m not a big fan of collective bargaining. Unions were needed 100 years ago due to working conditions that are now controlled by government regulations. I’ve never worked in a union environment. When we (had partners) started a company here was never a reason for a union.

Last edited by RJM
@Senna posted:

As husband of a woman who has over 20 years of experience in elementary education (well over half at Title 1 facilities), holds an EdD, and is an instruction coach for her school, I find the general lack of appreciation for educators expressed in these recent posts to be very disappointing. 

My wife is a teacher. Has an M.ED. She would agree with most of these posts. She is frustrated with her peers and their approach to handling this situation. She spends hours every night grading papers and is extremely committed to being the best she can be. Has been teacher of the year at her school multiple times and once for the district.

We live in one of the best school districts in our state and still send our son to a private prep. An administrator at the best HS in our district just enrolled her son in the same prep this year. 

Are there good teachers, yep, lots of them. Are there bad teachers, yep, lots of them. 

@Iowamom23 posted:

So I'm now curious--and maybe this should be a different thread--there seems to be a lot of crankiness with teachers unions. What do people think of players unions? 

in General , I am anti any union in any industry. 

I just think that unions are there to protect the weak.. The good and strong will always be successful.

Most employees, in many industries are good workers in their fields. There are certain percentages that are not and are lazy and just put their time in without any passion what so ever.  The unions protect them.

It is also kind of like how it is difficult/impossible to fire a GOV'T employee.. that is ridiculous. 

In these many cases the govt is the union protecting the many weak who hide behind this protective curtain..(and I know many my self that fall into this catagory..taking 2 hour lunches,going to movies during the day (before wuhan)....it makes me sick. abusing the system of protection. 

there should never be a protective curtain.. 

 In Sports ..there is no where to hide. If you do not have what it takes or the passion to improve it will be unveiled soon in one way or another and your lack will be shown for all to see.  It is up to you to improve and fix or get out and find another gig..

  In Union/govt jobs  - this is never the case. 

I am self employeed and havent received a paycheck from an employer since I was in college. 

No guaranteed weekly salary.. no pension, no employee 401k(have my own) , no tenure.  If I do not produce -then my family suffers.

It is as easy as that. Should be that way for most.  Unions hide that.  the Govt hides that. 

 

 

 

Last edited by fishnsail

There are good and bad teachers.  It has always been this way. Some teachers are good for some kids and bad for others.

There are good and bad coaches, haven't we heard that a lot on here?

What about good teachers who are bad coaches?  What about good coaches who are bad teachers?  What about coaches who are good for some kids and bad for others?

I have never heard of a coaches' union.  That doesn't stop some bad coaches keeping their jobs. 

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×