Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

I really hope it works out, but I'm not holding my breath. You can keep athletes pretty safe, but can you keep them away from off campus house parties, girls, etc? Even if a school went 100% virtual, upperclassmen are still going to be living off campus, hanging out, etc. School can't control what goes on a mile off campus. 

Whether it is justified or not, I'm fully expecting all college students to be home by mid October. "University of ________ student dies from Covid complications" is not a good headline for anybody, even if the school were 100% virtual it doesn't stop the mob from creating bad press. 

Hoping for the best, expecting the very little. 

Last week my niece was informed her Pac-12 softball (and all undergrads) will now be stay at home and online classes.  Prior to that everything was set to be on campus learning and athletics as usual.  As it gets closer to January a decision will be made on classes and athletics.  I feel sorry for all college students since an important part of college life has now been put on hold indefinately.  Stay safe

Our local college was literally in the process of moving football players in when the conference decided to cancel the season. Son said right now they are planning things to be as usual, although I think he will be tested once a week. Very few students at his school live in dorms other than freshmen, so maybe that will help?? Or maybe not.

I'd argue that any "plan" that doesn't account for behaviors inherent to the college age group, is not a plan.  Hope is not a strategy.  I'd say the same thing for any national plan.  If your plan requires 90-95-100% adherence of 328 million people, you need to head back to the drawing board.  Same thing for adherence of 20,000 college students.  It's either that or adjust your desired outcome.  I think we should spend more time talking about what CAN be accomplished versus what we WISH could be accomplished.  

@DanJ posted:

I'd argue that any "plan" that doesn't account for behaviors inherent to the college age group, is not a plan.  Hope is not a strategy.  I'd say the same thing for any national plan.  If your plan requires 90-95-100% adherence of 328 million people, you need to head back to the drawing board.  Same thing for adherence of 20,000 college students.  It's either that or adjust your desired outcome.  I think we should spend more time talking about what CAN be accomplished versus what we WISH could be accomplished.  

100% agree with this post.   Now I am hoping that Notre Dame sticks with their two week online only plan just announced - I do assume this was part of their plan if there was more than expected noncompliance.   If they end up sending kids home I am afraid that spring will be canceled too.   The only thing that could save spring if colleges bail on fall now would be a vaccine that could occur in a few months but then needs mass production.   The Notre Dame issue (as Ripken Fan points out) seems to be linked to an off campus party.  I think the kids who threw it and those that went should be restricted from campus and be online for the balance of the year (or semester).   

Bringing them to campus, then sending them home (as UNC did) seems like the worst possible option.  Students will take the virus back to their families and home communities.  UNC apparently had only 75 rooms for quarantine and 75 for isolation, and they filled up their quarantine rooms the first week.  What on earth did they expect, with 30,000 students?  I think what Notre Dame is doing is better, and I hope they keep the students on-campus, with classes online, even if cases go up.  That's the only way to get through this.  In 1918 they set up large wards in gyms, for those infected with influenza, that's what is needed now. 

Mind you, the off-campus students are complete idiots.  But they probably will stay in their apartments regardless, and maybe they don't care that their classes are now online.  So the ones who are hurt are the ones who have to leave dorms, and maybe that includes athletes, and the ones whose classes (like labs) don't work online.

From a public health standpoint, spring may be in jeopardy.  From a financial standpoint, the colleges who have to refund room and board now have an even bigger incentive to make spring work.  I sure hope so. 

Just as a note, in May, Will Emmert of the NCAA and the head of the ACC said that there would be no sports if students weren't on campus.  Apparently that is walked back (no surprise):

https://www.newsobserver.com/s...rticle245041645.html

@PTWood posted:

@RIPKENFAN Cases Already jumped to 150+ and they just announced remote classes for two weeks. Over 50 cases traced to the one off campus party. Ugh.

I'm sorry to see this. I saw the headlines in the news but reading it from people who are close to it really does bring it home. Hopefully this 2-week thing helps curb a few parties and the students unite to figure out a way to stay on campus. It's not fair to those who really want to be there, study/learn, and do the right things to enable that.  

I might be wrong but I think that most of this is a result of off campus parties and hanging out.  One in Tuscaloosa at a bar and the mayor of the town is really upset.  There was a video of an off campus pool party  at FAU.  The kids were doing back flips off the roof of the home into the pool.  With that I don't think that Corona scares them at all.   Starkville having a huge outdoor yearly event, the town said please dont, and the promoters said they will be wearing masks. Sure, ok. 

Some schools started with online classes to switch in September. That was smart.  

Big 10 players and parents not happy with them canceling football. People headed to the conferences main offices.

 

 

I know it's not a popular opinion but why not just stop testing asymptomatic 20 years olds, cull, quarantine and treat anyone with symptoms and let this crap run it's course?  Offer an online alternative for vulnerable demographics to stay home.  There is absolutely zero chance that a population in this age group is going to isolate this virus through voluntary social distancing action. It's out there, and its going to spread until it runs out of suitable host, either via herd immunity or mass vaccinations.  

Doing the hokey pokey, stop and start, is not a reasonable strategy.  

Last edited by 22and25
@22and25 posted:

I know it's not a popular opinion but why not just stop testing asymptomatic 20 years olds, cull, quarantine and treat anyone with symptoms and let this crap run it's course?  Offer an online alternative for vulnerable demographics to stay home.  There is absolutely zero chance that a population in this age group is going to isolate this virus through voluntary social distancing action. It's out there, and its going to spread until it runs out of suitable host, either via herd immunity or mass vaccinations.  

Doing the hokey pokey, stop and start, is not a reasonable strategy.  

I think it depends what plans were submitted to the state for a COVID plan.

@22and25 posted:

I know it's not a popular opinion but why not just stop testing asymptomatic 20 years olds, cull, quarantine and treat anyone with symptoms and let this crap run it's course?  Offer an online alternative for vulnerable demographics to stay home.  There is absolutely zero chance that a population in this age group is going to isolate this virus through voluntary social distancing action. It's out there, and its going to spread until it runs out of suitable host, either via herd immunity or mass vaccinations.  

Doing the hokey pokey, stop and start, is not a reasonable strategy.  

I agree 100%. Why even try something if you aren’t expecting the inevitable that there will be outbreaks. If you are testing everybody you are bound to get positive tests. Heck, even the false positive rate is practically enough to shut some plans down. 

Baseball, folks...  What is happening with the UNC baseball team, does anyone know?  Do they get to stay on campus as athletes?  Or do they have to go home?  So can they practice at all?  For that matter, can Big Ten baseball teams have any fall team activities?

Sports were not closed down at UNC. I think it is only a few weeks for online classes, and students were not sent home. I did hear that Ohio State was not shutting down sports.

@22and25 posted:

My point was directed at whomever is making policy, the university or the state or the NCAA or .......

 

The school makes the guidelines  based on CDC and state guidelines and then approved by state. That's how it is in FL, can't  speak for another state. 

NCAA for sports only and a plan is given and approved based on guidelines.

Like so many others, I wish the insanity would stop.   Understand everything that I'm about to point out I consider a horrible tragedy, and many speculated about "unknowns",  but let us focus on some of our knowns.

Per the CDC's current data, over the last 6 months in the U.S. (2/1 thru 8/8), 16 infants have died of Covid, and 9,149 infants have died of other causes in that time.  Covid accounts for 0.17% of infant deaths in the last 6 months.  For children age 1-4 there have been 10 deaths and 1,741 from other causes, meaning Covid represents 0.57% of deaths in this age group over the last 6 months.  For children between ages 5 and 14, there have been 23 recorded Covid deaths and 2,691 from other causes.  This corresponds to 0.84% of deaths in this age group.  For all the above mentioned age groups Pneumonia (without the presence of Covid) has accounted for 5 times as many deaths as Covid in the past 6 months.  For young people age 15-24 (includes most all HS and College athletes) there have been 242 deaths from Covid in the past 6 months and 16,837 from other causes.  This represents 1.4% of the deaths in this age group. 

Effectively, 100% of these tragic Covid deaths had pre-existing conditions.  Aggregately, people under the age of 25 are 105x more likely to die from something that is not Covid-19 than Covid-19.

It is time to get back to the classroom, and if you want these young people to have fear of something that might hurt them,  Covid should be way down on the list.  For no age group under 85 years, does the number of deaths from Covid over the past 6 months exceed 9% of the total causes of deaths.

If anyone feels that students shouldn't be in the classroom, on the field, the court, or in the weight room based on these numbers, please explain this to me with some evidence to support that conclusion.  Please be rational, and logical because that is what we need right now, a lot more than crazy inflammatory language we heard on the news.

 

Last edited by Pedaldad

I have absolutely no problem with people in low-risk groups being exposed to coronavirus.  It would be great if we could put them all in camps (i.e. colleges), and let them take care of each other until they had all had caught it and recovered.  And then give them all high-quality healthcare to treat any lingering problems.  The problem is that in real life those low-risk people come into contact with high-risk people.  What do you do about their families?  Teachers, and their families?  Food service workers?  Bus drivers?  Coaches?  All of the people they come into contact with?  If you put kids in schools and colleges, then the virus will spread - look how fast it is spreading in colleges - and will spread outside of the school population. 

Having said that, I do think that once colleges bring students back, they have an obligation to keep them at the college; sending them home to spread the germs further does not make sense at all.

TCM, Iowa Mom, PT Wood, NYC DAD:

Our country is in a crisis.

The Colleges are seeking National leadership.

You may recall after 9/11 the City of NY established a special task force of former FBI, CIA professionals and when a " shooting" occur in the World they sent in a team to investigate and learn.

Our American teams were in Australia and China and I observed the details of this "task" force. When Sars virus occurred in China my Task force contact  said "do not travel".

We need a National task force of Generals, Educators, Medical professionals to provide "honest" and consistent information to the States, Schools, parents. The game of baseball is a minor factor in our current "crisis".

Bob

 

 

 

@nycdad posted:

Not sure why people treat contracting Covid as a binary operation. There are many outcomes outside of...die and be fine. A lot of them suck, with many unknowns.

"There are 10 types of people. Those who understand binary, and those who don't".

Not sure why people treat managing Covid as a binary operation. The majority of people have little risk of dieing or having any adverse outcomes and will be fine.  It sucks but life should go on.

"There are 10 types of people. Those who understand binary, and those who don't".

@Pedaldad if you insist on dealing with PERCENTAGES, you must understand that about half of the population is not going to listen to you. That MIGHT change after the election. If you want the other half of the population to listen to you, you’ll have to speak in NUMBERS.  Sadly, one can easily tell a lot about a person based on which of those two designations they use. The narrative goes something like this... use percentages and you don’t care about about the death of Mrs. Sally Jensen from Woodford, IA. Use numbers and you don’t care about forcing roughly 328 million people to give up the things that make their lives worth living. Of course, both are asinine.  

The solution lies in the middle. A mix of safety protocols and accepting that Covid, like so much else, is going to take large numbers of lives. The US lost approx 60,000 lives last year to influenza. 60,000 wonderful lives that no one said jack stuff about.  We didn’t wear masks to save their precious lives nor did we social distance or even wash our hands more often for them. Why? Because we have a vaccine that is semi-effective? No. The fact is, we’ve made peace with our balance of influenza safety protocols and the massive number of deaths that it causes each and every year. Just like we do with every other thing that plagues us. Balance. The roadmap is there and we absolutely will end up there. But it’s an election year and we’ve convinced ourselves that this is the most important election in the history of the country, so the inevitable has to wait until after it to even be discussed. Spoiler Alert!  We all know how this story ends because we’ve seen it a hundred times already. 

@nycdad posted:

Not sure why people treat contracting Covid as a binary operation. There are many outcomes outside of...die and be fine. A lot of them suck, with many unknowns.

"There are 10 types of people. Those who understand binary, and those who don't"

I get the joke, but can you provide some hard evidence for the "outcomes outside of die that suck." with the rate of occurrence. I am not being sardonic.  I look very hard for this information and if you have a legitimate source with data, I'd like to look at it for myself.  If you don't, then I worry this is repeated conjecture that causes people to be paralyzed by irrational fear, like when they rely on media.

It makes me think of one of my partner's Amish patients.  My partner asked this Amish patient how their community was doing in the wake of this pandemic.  His reply was,  " We are doing fine.  We don't watch the news."

@DanJ posted:

@Pedaldad if you insist on dealing with PERCENTAGES, you must understand that about half of the population is not going to listen to you. That MIGHT change after the election. If you want the other half of the population to listen to you, you’ll have to speak in NUMBERS.  Sadly, one can easily tell a lot about a person based on which of those two designations they use. The narrative goes something like this... use percentages and you don’t care about about the death of Mrs. Sally Jensen from Woodford, IA. Use numbers and you don’t care about forcing roughly 328 million people to give up the things that make their lives worth living. Of course, both are asinine.  

The solution lies in the middle. A mix of safety protocols and accepting that Covid, like so much else, is going to take large numbers of lives. The US lost approx 60,000 lives last year to influenza. 60,000 wonderful lives that no one said jack stuff about.  We didn’t wear masks to save their precious lives nor did we social distance or even wash our hands more often for them. Why? Because we have a vaccine that is semi-effective? No. The fact is, we’ve made peace with our balance of influenza safety protocols and the massive number of deaths that it causes each and every year. Just like we do with every other thing that plagues us. Balance. The roadmap is there and we absolutely will end up there. But it’s an election year and we’ve convinced ourselves that this is the most important election in the history of the country, so the inevitable has to wait until after it to even be discussed. Spoiler Alert!  We all know how this story ends because we’ve seen it a hundred times already. 

I get the point, and it is well made.

If you notice I wrote with both numbers and percentages.  I didn't want anyone thinking that I didn't care about the 16 infants that died of Covid, or the nearly 10,000 infants that died of something else the past 6 months.

@Pedaldad posted:

I get the joke, but can you provide some hard evidence for the "outcomes outside of die that suck." with the rate of occurrence. I am not being sardonic.  I look very hard for this information and if you have a legitimate source with data, I'd like to look at it for myself.  If you don't, then I worry this is repeated conjecture that causes people to be paralyzed by irrational fear, like when they rely on media.

It makes me think of one of my partner's Amish patients.  My partner asked this Amish patient how their community was doing in the wake of this pandemic.  His reply was,  " We are doing fine.  We don't watch the news."

Are you asking me to provide hard evidence for "outcomes outside of die that suck"? Can we agree that "suck" is a subjective term? What information are you looking very hard for exactly? 

Looking at your history, do you have a horse in the race? Seems like you're just someone who likes to be the contrarian which is fine, and needed! but interested to know the end game....if there is one outside of internet troll....?

@TPM posted:

https://www.espn.com/college-f...ule-model-idle-teams

For those wondering about teams not competing this fall.

Thank you for this link TPM, but what a disingenuous way for the NCAA to go about this.  They have no control.  Six conferences have said "try to stop us", and the NCAA can't.   Now they think to insert themselves in practice guidelines for the remaining schools that aren't playing.  Give me a break.  Coaches and Athletic Departments are going to do whatever their Presidents/ Boards will allow and dare the NCAA to come after them for it.   

@nycdad posted:

Are you asking me to provide hard evidence for "outcomes outside of die that suck"? Can we agree that "suck" is a subjective term? What information are you looking very hard for exactly? 

Looking at your history, do you have a horse in the race? Seems like you're just someone who likes to be the contrarian which is fine, and needed! but interested to know the end game....if there is one outside of internet troll....?

Going to follow-up to this because I can see where it's going.....We can argue who is right, or who has that more "pithy" reply, but at the end of the day, do you think any of your contributions to this forum have helped anyone anyone on their baseball journey? Not sure mine have.....

Our local D3 is bringing kids in next week. They start out with half kids attending in person classes half the days, the other half the opposite days. Masks required except in dorm rooms.  They do that for two weeks and if things go well, the rules loosen.

Everyone is required to live on campus.

Classes being held pretty much every day, including Labor Day, so kids won't be tempted to go home. They have space set aside for people who test positive.

Kids leave for Thanksgiving, take finals online and don't come back til January.

It seems like a good plan. We'll see how ti works like in real life.

@nycdad posted:

Are you asking me to provide hard evidence for "outcomes outside of die that suck"? Can we agree that "suck" is a subjective term? What information are you looking very hard for exactly? 

Looking at your history, do you have a horse in the race? Seems like you're just someone who likes to be the contrarian which is fine, and needed! but interested to know the end game....if there is one outside of internet troll....?

To your first question the answer is;  YES, I am asking you (or anyone else) stating that their are adverse outcomes to Covid other than death to provide evidence of suck because that is what you wrote.  I've only seen conjecture and inflammatory news reports; I haven't seen valid documentation.  If it isn't obvious, I tend to look.

Second, Yes, we can agree that "suck" is subjective.  But it was your word to describe outcomes, not mine.  I used "adverse". 

No, I am not "trying to be contrarian".  I strive to be educated as I think we all should. Most seem to agree that this is an important issue.  For the record, I emphatically disagree with people that don't think baseball and sports are important in America.

Finally I have two horses in this race.  Number 1 is my son that I want to see compete is this year.  Number 2 is society and youth overall that I want to see thrive in this country.  We all should have horses in this race of one form or another.

I think this addresses all the concerns you expressed about my statements, so I want to return to your statement of  "other outcomes that suck".  Do you have any valid sources for that statement with  documented data?  I'd like to view them, again I strive to be educated,

 

Last edited by Pedaldad
@nycdad posted:

Going to follow-up to this because I can see where it's going.....We can argue who is right, or who has that more "pithy" reply, but at the end of the day, do you think any of your contributions to this forum have helped anyone anyone on their baseball journey? Not sure mine have.....

I don't know.

But I provide very little of my actual opinion.  If you really have reviewed my posts you will notice that most are based on evidence from reliable sources and data.  I have actually received private messages from multiple individuals on this forum either thanking me for providing info that they didn't know and sometimes requesting locations where they can look at things for themselves.  They are also trying to be educated.

You seem like an insightful person, and I think we both can agree that something really bad happened in NYC.  The death rate went up to between 7-8 times normal.  That is catastrophic.  So I would like to ask you, given the serious nature of that catastrophe, why would anyone want to make claims about this pandemic that that make it out to be worse than the horrible event that it already is without hard evidence of such? 

@Iowamom23 posted:

Our local D3 is bringing kids in next week. They start out with half kids attending in person classes half the days, the other half the opposite days. Masks required except in dorm rooms.  They do that for two weeks and if things go well, the rules loosen.

Everyone is required to live on campus.

Classes being held pretty much every day, including Labor Day, so kids won't be tempted to go home. They have space set aside for people who test positive.

Kids leave for Thanksgiving, take finals online and don't come back til January.

It seems like a good plan. We'll see how ti works like in real life.

this is what my son's D2 was supposed to do until last Friday they switched to all virtual learning and campus would be shut down.  Son has a team meeting this week to discuss the fall with the coach

@2022NYC posted:

On a somewhat related note, are your schools adjusting the tuition for remote learning?   

Don't get me started this early! Nope for Holy Cross. Just waiting for them to post my credit for room and board so I can request my refund.   I think I will get back the student activity fee ($360) but at some point they said that fee should still apply and I should get back student health fee ($180).   These are not even rounding errors.

I leave to drop my son at his school in 24 hours.  His school will test on arrival (12:30 tomorrow is his covid test).  He has to stay in room until result (24 hour turn around) but can get grab and go food.  His school has made week 1 of school all online with professors in class rooms zooming to students in dorms.  It is my hope that they extend that to two weeks.   We are drilling into his head to follow all protocols.  Baseball practice starts on 9/13.

Having said that, I do think that once colleges bring students back, they have an obligation to keep them at the college; sending them home to spread the germs further does not make sense at all.

As I have said in other threads, I think it is a liability issue.  Let the kids get sick and spread it around, but don't make he University liable for it. 

I am curious how the Southern states will do, since many of us had major outbreaks this summer due to kids/young adults ignoring social distancing.

Thank you TPM.  The sad part, which I fully understand, is that college kids are getting a rude understanding of life due to Covid.  I know of three different campuses that are experiencing Covid among athletes.  One has all athletes in dorms so the ones who tested positive are having to stay in a dorm room for 14 days with no live interaction with anyone.  They knock on the door and leave their food outside on a table three times a day.  The other two are similar except they have freshmen in dorms and others in apartments.  The ones in apartments that tested positive were quarantined in their apartments and their roommates had to find somewhere else to live.  The freshmen are quarantined in a motel room by themselves.  At least they put the apartment guys in an apartment together but their apartment mates had to gather all their stuff and move somewhere for 2 weeks.  Their is fear of what to do and how they will be affected when they go back.  If they still test positive after 2 weeks it starts all over.  Not the baseball experience these guys were expecting.   I understand it but it is sad.

I honestly think a series of posters and social media information should lay out the choices — follow the guidelines and live on campus or don't follow and go home to your parents' house. While I've enjoyed having my kids home during the pandemic (mostly) they are DESPERATE to go back out on their own.

(and I will NEVER again sympathize when they complain about slob roommates. Nor will I buy them trash cans or dressers, they don't use either). Sorry, it's been a long morning of cleaning!!

 

What I find interesting is one of the major networks did an interview with both UNC Chapel Hill and Notre Dame.    Their chancellors went on about their unique testing procedures, protocols, and how they were going to be different.   I said to my wife...""we'll see how this goes in a month after they cash the tuition check and send everybody home".   This little experiment lasted a couple days for these two schools, and it is just a matter of time before the other schools do the same.    Stevie Wonder saw this coming.

@2022NYC posted:

On a somewhat related note, are your schools adjusting the tuition for remote learning?   

Not so far!  I think Williams is still the only school I have heard of doing that.  

I think most parents and students would agree that online-only classes are worth less than in-person classes. 

But we can't assume that the cost for schools to present classes online is less than it is for in-person.  In some cases it may be more.  Software costs money.  They still have their campuses and most associated costs.

 

@Viking0 posted:

As I have said in other threads, I think it is a liability issue.  Let the kids get sick and spread it around, but don't make he University liable for it. 

I am curious how the Southern states will do, since many of us had major outbreaks this summer due to kids/young adults ignoring social distancing.

Is this true?  I have never heard of a university being liable for kids getting sick or dying from anything, not even from asbestos that we know is all over many colleges.  Nor have they been liable for deaths at parties, suicide, drunk driving, drug overdoses, etc... at least not that I've heard.  Is Covid being treated differently by the courts?

@2022NYC posted:

On a somewhat related note, are your schools adjusting the tuition for remote learning?   

We got a tuition reimbursement for having classes online.  It was automatic based on the number of classes that were online or a flat rate if at least 12 hours were virtual.  My son had one class and a lab on campus but his coach requested he do all online yesterday, so now he is fully online.

@Smitty28 posted:

Is this true?  I have never heard of a university being liable for kids getting sick or dying from anything, not even from asbestos that we know is all over many colleges.  Nor have they been liable for deaths at parties, suicide, drunk driving, drug overdoses, etc... at least not that I've heard.  Is Covid being treated differently by the courts?

Exactly.  My daughter's freshman year, over 100 kids got the flu the first week.  Did I miss my opportunity to make some money???

I highly doubt the universities are liable so long as they make some reasonable accommodations and attempts at prevention and student health initiatives.  That mostly leaves one smoking gun - PR.  No institution wants to be the 1st unnecessary tragedy or be plastered all over the news for student infections and deaths.  Imagine the PR nightmare that would come in the wake of freshmen Jenny Newman passing away from Covid at State U because she pursued her dream to become a special education teacher.  Jenny saved her pennies since she was 7 to help pay for college and when she wasn't in the library, she volunteers her time down at the homeless shelter.  Well, she used to, anyway.  No university can afford to have that story tagged to them.  They're already reeling financially and a story like this would be the death knell for many.

@fenwaysouth posted:

What I find interesting is one of the major networks did an interview with both UNC Chapel Hill and Notre Dame.    Their chancellors went on about their unique testing procedures, protocols, and how they were going to be different.   I said to my wife...""we'll see how this goes in a month after they cash the tuition check and send everybody home".   This little experiment lasted a couple days for these two schools, and it is just a matter of time before the other schools do the same.    Stevie Wonder saw this coming.

yup...was about to write a painful check for the whole semester but then saw that there is a monthly pay option.  We'll go with that.

Told myself I would avoid any thread with COVID in it, but this is something I work on so here goes (not political, no opinions herein):

Liability is something of an open question at present. a central question will be: did the institution take reasonable steps to safeguard its students and staff from infection? My lay sense (not an attorney) is that most institutions have done so. Liberty U may be an example of an outlier, based on the opinions of others regarding their re-opening procedures. 

For public institutions, there's another sort of liability (esp. at the K-12 levels): schools who don't provide adequate instruction are most definitely liable for damages from the affected students/their families. 

States are taking quite different approaches to the overall question of liability. Some are holding employers (including universities) harmless from liability generally (Utah, for example). Others are passing bills/exec orders with rebuttable presumptions that COVID infections are a workplace injury and WC claims should be honored by insurers. McConnell has signaled he wants blanket liability for all American employers as part of a COVID aid bill; Dems are opposed and a bill isn't moving at any rate.

Have a nice day, Bill 

 

@Smitty28 posted:

Is this true?  I have never heard of a university being liable for kids getting sick or dying from anything, not even from asbestos that we know is all over many colleges.  Nor have they been liable for deaths at parties, suicide, drunk driving, drug overdoses, etc... at least not that I've heard.  Is Covid being treated differently by the courts?

You are probably correct in the whole scheme of things.  All I'm going to say is that this is a major concern for Universities, and I am in discussions in regard to this.  We have to be over the top in many things due to our insurance.  The problem is that there will be lawsuits, and just like with covid in general, there is a big unknown factor in it. 

Our University President is very big on going face to face, so we will definitely do it.  However, the PR thing is real.  A petition by a small number of students to go full online is big in the press (and supported by many faculty).  One student died from covid while not attending.  That was huge in the press, and lead to many to call for us to go all online.  If students come back and one dies, it will make national news, I guarantee it.  It is a mine field. 

Son left last Wednesday.  Moved into his dorm with three other 2020's. Classes start Monday. Nothing official concerning baseball has started for him, no practices, meetings or anything. Athlete's gym has not opened yet. They are allowed to go to the field on their own and throw at any time, but groundskeepers sometimes run them off if they are doing any maintenance to the field.

I know they put the fear of Covid into him. If any of the four in his room test positive, they are all quarantined. He said he would be pissed if one of his roommates got it.  I'm sure they said the same about him, so definitely some peer pressure to follow precautions.

@umpin757 posted:

I umpired a local college wood bat league team and one of their Ivy league players said that he would be surprised if they have a spring season in 2021.

I was just looking at the Ivy commits for 2021 this morning. Some of them have surprisingly small numbers. I wonder if they had any kids choose to go a different direction as a result of them being a little more aggressive with cancelling than other schools. 

I think the PR nightmare is becoming real for colleges that cancel as well.  They will lose recruits and players and parents are starting to stand up and be heard as well.  Michigan State just announced they weren't letting kids come after requiring them to pay for room and board 2 weeks ago.  That is a complete breakdown of the administration and gives kids no choices.  I would think twice about ever sending my kid to a school that did that.  My son's friend was set to leave tomorrow and got an email last night.  Terrible leadership in my opinion.

I think I can speak for everyone when I say that we all are hoping that college baseball is played in the spring.  Truth be told, I am worn down at this point - to the nub.  I've been optimistic, I've contributed and I've had hope.  But it's been eroded again and again over the last 6ish months.  I'd LOVE to hear someone make a realistic argument for why they believe baseball WILL happen in the spring.  To be clear, I am not really interested in hearing how it COULD happen.  Mostly because that's been said time and time again and none of it has been realistic in my opinion.  Is there any realistic argument to be made right now that it actually WILL happen in the spring?  If so, please, indulge me.  I need something realistic to recharge my hope.

Ok, here is my argument for why baseball will happen in the spring.  

The election will be long over and the 24 hour news cycle will lose interest as Covid will no longer be a political bludgeon.  The positive trends will actually be allowed to see the light of day and more people will realize that life should go on, particularly for people 18-29 who have close to zero chance of having any lasting effects from Covid.

Last edited by 22and25
@DanJ posted:

I think I can speak for everyone when I say that we all are hoping that college baseball is played in the spring.  Truth be told, I am worn down at this point - to the nub.  I've been optimistic, I've contributed and I've had hope.  But it's been eroded again and again over the last 6ish months.  I'd LOVE to hear someone make a realistic argument for why they believe baseball WILL happen in the spring.  To be clear, I am not really interested in hearing how it COULD happen.  Mostly because that's been said time and time again and none of it has been realistic in my opinion.  Is there any realistic argument to be made right now that it actually WILL happen in the spring?  If so, please, indulge me.  I need something realistic to recharge my hope.

A few ways:

A vaccine will be approved in October timeframe.  Just too many shots on goal for me to think otherwise.  It won't get ramped quick enough to get to everyone but if high risk people are getting the vaccine, and 20% of the population has the virus (and studies are now showing the antibodies do work out 3+ months),  plus better behaviors and also people who are actually immune - this combo can make it safe to gather during late winter.   All has to fall right but it's not a complete long shot.  I think this will happen but I am an optimist.

Outside of that, these could work too:

If a good number of colleges work through the predictable early covid outbreaks and are able to have any semblance of a semester that will pressure more schools to get kids on campus.  We will know even more about the virus in 4 months (when spring decisions will be made).  There will be better therapeutics too.  

If ACC, SEC and Big10 have full seasons or close to it, that will assist.  I just saw the Big10 has 5-6 schools looking to put together a 10 game season too. That would be cool.  I do worry about Football though with the travel but could happen.   Remember the coronabro panic on the Marlins - MLB stuck it out and so far it's working.

Schools could decide to send kids home and keep athletes in a bubble in Fall and Spring.   That would be interesting.  As a father of a baseball player that would be great.  As a father of a nonathlete daughter this would also annoy me.

Baseball is an outdoor sport so I am confident that league play and other local competition could occur if schools allow kids or athletes on campus.

Also, the election will calm some things down no matter who wins (not a political statement).

There will be a spring season.

@DanJ posted:

I think I can speak for everyone when I say that we all are hoping that college baseball is played in the spring.  Truth be told, I am worn down at this point - to the nub.  I've been optimistic, I've contributed and I've had hope.  But it's been eroded again and again over the last 6ish months.  I'd LOVE to hear someone make a realistic argument for why they believe baseball WILL happen in the spring.  To be clear, I am not really interested in hearing how it COULD happen.  Mostly because that's been said time and time again and none of it has been realistic in my opinion.  Is there any realistic argument to be made right now that it actually WILL happen in the spring?  If so, please, indulge me.  I need something realistic to recharge my hope.

What is realistic?  No cases?  That's not going to happen.  It's not going away and a huge portion of the population has no desire to be a guinea pig with the new vaccine. The realistic way we play is that people realize that the death rate has leveled off to be similar to flu and we stop freaking out every time someone has it.  There are people that are scared and it's not ever going to be safe enough for them and they should monitor their own risk.

I don’t have any skin in the game since my kids are past college ball. They’re working adults. I work part time out of my house. It’s actually easier I don’t have to visit clients.

The only issue is I haven’t seen my better half for five months now. She’s in FL with her elderly mother. I can’t travel down and walk in. I’m at the point I’ve considered quarantining in a hotel for two weeks. 

I’m falling back to an old hsbaseballweb saying ... Control what you can. Figure out how to deal with the rest.

i can’t control COVID. I can only control my odds of getting it. Like it or not, I can only wait to see what happens. 

Other than not seeing my “other” my life is reasonably normal. I dine out, outside. I just spent a long weekend at the lake with friends. I know they’re being cautious. However,

I have come up in five COVID strings due to the irresponsibility of their twenty-something kids. None of the parents have tested positive.

My point is unless you like arguing the only thing to do is sit back and see what follows.

Last edited by RJM
@baseballhs posted:

What is realistic?  No cases?  That's not going to happen.  It's not going away and a huge portion of the population has no desire to be a guinea pig with the new vaccine. The realistic way we play is that people realize that the death rate has leveled off to be similar to flu and we stop freaking out every time someone has it.  There are people that are scared and it's not ever going to be safe enough for them and they should monitor their own risk.

Yes, but I think at that point, the two choices will be "get a vaccine" or "too bad if you get it," just as it is with the flu, and that will put pressure on things to open.

I agree with Gunner, but he does have some big "ifs".  "If" things go well at some schools . . . we will see.  Maybe some of these idiot kids will realize that consequences for many people, not just students, actually depend on their behavior.  Preliminary decisions about spring semester have to be taken by October, when registration for spring classes happens; the question is, will things be going in enough of a positive direction by then? 

@DanJ posted:

I think I can speak for everyone when I say that we all are hoping that college baseball is played in the spring.  Truth be told, I am worn down at this point - to the nub.  I've been optimistic, I've contributed and I've had hope.  But it's been eroded again and again over the last 6ish months.  I'd LOVE to hear someone make a realistic argument for why they believe baseball WILL happen in the spring.  To be clear, I am not really interested in hearing how it COULD happen.  Mostly because that's been said time and time again and none of it has been realistic in my opinion.  Is there any realistic argument to be made right now that it actually WILL happen in the spring?  If so, please, indulge me.  I need something realistic to recharge my hope.

Sorry, I really wish I could help you, but there are many more reasons to think we won’t see college baseball in the spring.
It’s very unlikely that millions of college students and faculty will be vaccinated before the spring semester begins.
Colleges are not likely to be any more amenable to hosting more outbreaks than they have shown to be this fall.
College sports are not likely to happen unless most of the general student population is back on campus.
Baseball and other spring sports only generate significant revenue at a handful of schools.

I am optimistic that the 2021/2022 school year will be much closer to normal than this one.

Thanks for all the contributions.  Sincerely.  I actually feel a little bit better.  While I disagree with some pieces of things people have contributed, I commend everyone on not going dark/political to a point where divisions happen quickly and everything devolves.  A few thoughts:

-When I say “realistic,” I actually mean PROBABLE.  For example, there was some mention of kids being idiots and being irresponsible.  That is true.  It’s also static for all Covid intents and purposes.  If de-idiot’ing college-aged kids and getting them to be responsible over the next 6 months is part of a plan, go back to the drawing board and try again.  This is not at all realistic/probable.  Being irresponsible and idiotic is a product of years of learned behavior and age.  It’s what they do and we have zero chance of stopping that train on a dime.  We can ask for their help, but must plan to receive zero from them.

-While I think the election result could help baseball happen, I think it highly dependent upon who wins.  For the record, I will not vote for either of the major party candidates and I don’t want to get sucked into who is better or who sucks less.  There’s already plenty of that out there.  I am skeptical that a trump win would make baseball more likely.  Whether you feel he’s earned it or not, I’d hope we all could agree that no one will take it any easier on him if he’s reelected.  If anything, it stands to strengthen his opposition’s resolve.  Trump could give someone CPR and bring them back from death and there are tens of millions who would find serious problems with that.  I’m saying that would be justified or not, but it would certainly be PROBABLE.

-There is confidence one of the current vaccines in trial (I only know of 2) will work well (I’ve read 60% effective would be a win).  I honestly don’t know.  I know that the flu vaccine is simply our doctor’s best guess for the coming flu season, so I am assuming any Covid vaccine would also simply be our best guess as well.  But surely after this many years, our guesses with the flu vaccine are highly educated and refined.  Can we assume we’ll guess as accurately on try #1 for Covid?  I hope so, but is that PROBABLE?  I have no idea, but someone does.  Speak up if you do!

-It makes sense to me that if some schools stick with in class learning no matter what, that it could help others follow suit, but does anyone seriously think that’s PROBABLE at this point?  We’ll know a lot more in the coming weeks, but as of right now, doesn’t it look most likely that schools will pull back versus stay the course?

-There is a certain percentage of the population that is freaked out.  Some are every bit as freaked out today as they were earlier in the year.  I do not think it’s PROBABLE that many of them quickly get un-freaked out.  Especially when more infections and deaths are 100% guaranteed to happen and for a while.  If expecting people to stop being freaked out within the next few months is part of the plan, we’ll need a new plan.

-While I’d agree we will one day get to a “get the vaccine or take your chances” place, that is not PROBABLE to occur in time to help baseball happen in the spring, hence cannot be part of any realistic plan.

Good dialogue by all.  Yes, I am scrutinizing some of it, but I promise I'm asking in good faith. Thank you all and keep it coming and as politically benign as possible!

@DanJ posted:

 

 

-It makes sense to me that if some schools stick with in class learning no matter what, that it could help others follow suit, but does anyone seriously think that’s PROBABLE at this point?  We’ll know a lot more in the coming weeks, but as of right now, doesn’t it look most likely that schools will pull back versus stay the course?

 

I absolutely believe many schools will stick with the plan.  While there might be a two week quarantine from time to time with everyone learning online I do think many colleges and universities will stay the course.   Other colleges may allow students to stay on campus with only online learning.  You will hear about the issues loudly but not the successes.  

We just packed our SUV up with our son's dorm stuff and as I write this I feel very good about his school's opportunity to get the full semester in (home at Thanksgiving).   It's not a huge school (2,400 students).  The testing and tracing plan is good as are the isolation plans.  The baseball coach has sent some great messages about how the players need to follow plans and be leaders.

I just hope everyone gets the flu shot this year and that when the vaccine comes people do take it.  I will have no issue taking the vaccine.  I thought about signing up for the trial too.

I also think some schools stick with the plan. I think overall the 3 conferences that decided to play football fare better, PR wise, than the ones who didn’t. That is obviously up for debate, but I think it gives others pause on pulling the plug quickly. Most of the really scared are home.  Universities need to appease the ones who showed up and paid.  Most of those do not want their kids sent home. They want a college experience.  Im tired of our lives being up to other people and I don’t think I’m alone. 

@DanJ posted:

I think I can speak for everyone when I say that we all are hoping that college baseball is played in the spring.  Truth be told, I am worn down at this point - to the nub.  I've been optimistic, I've contributed and I've had hope.  But it's been eroded again and again over the last 6ish months.  I'd LOVE to hear someone make a realistic argument for why they believe baseball WILL happen in the spring.  To be clear, I am not really interested in hearing how it COULD happen.  Mostly because that's been said time and time again and none of it has been realistic in my opinion.  Is there any realistic argument to be made right now that it actually WILL happen in the spring?  If so, please, indulge me.  I need something realistic to recharge my hope.

the day after election day it is going to magically start to diminish...by the holidays it will a footnote in hysteria history. 

I hope you took the opportunity to get invested back in March and April, it was literally the 2nd great crisis of the last 15 years, history will look at this in a monumental way...and it isn't going to be pretty what it records. 

Last edited by old_school
@old_school posted:

I think you have a better chance of being hit by a tidal wave in Kansas then this happening. 

Well, my daughter's school changed course last week and said no students on campus except for 500 of them.   Who are the 500?  An important group of the 500 are kids who don't have access to reliable internet/WiFi.  The school is doing right by that group.   The rest are athletes.   So her school has many athletes on campus and regular students at home (or renting off campus and partying).    Fall sports at her school have been canceled however.   But this shows the school is willing to house athletes. 

Did UNC send students home?  I am still a bit confused about what they did but press reports say they sent students home.  They didn't send their football team home, did they?   Nope.  Is the ACC playing, yes.   So looks like this is being done at a power 5 school already.   

So if you live in Kansas maybe its time to start getting quotes on flood insurance?

Last edited by Gunner Mack Jr.

I was just looking at the Ivy commits for 2021 this morning. Some of them have surprisingly small numbers. I wonder if they had any kids choose to go a different direction as a result of them being a little more aggressive with cancelling than other schools. 

If you are looking at the PG Commitments, not all Ivy commits do PG events. Also others wait until NLI/Likely Letters are received in November before they post a PG commit.

@Ripken Fan posted:

If you are looking at the PG Commitments, not all Ivy commits do PG events. Also others wait until NLI/Likely Letters are received in November before they post a PG commit.

TerribleBPTHrower,

In addition to RipkenFans post, there are a handful of Ivy commits who don't care to publically share their commitment or simply forgot to post to PG because they've moved on to other things.   I've known a quite a few recruits like this including my son.   In my experience, PG  has never been a great source for "telling the full story" with Ivy commits.

@baseballhs posted:

That is exactly what Michigan State did.  Athletes remain on campus for workouts in the Fall even though no one else is allowed on campus. 

I didn't know about this. I wonder if Mark Emmert does. Seems like a fine line between training and playing real games.

One of the main points Emmert made is that he does not envision a scenario where football or other sports can take place if students cannot return to their respective campuses.

“All of the Division I commissioners and every president that I’ve talked to is in clear agreement: If you don’t have students on campus, you don’t have student-athletes on campus,” Emmert said. “That doesn’t mean it has to be up and running in the full normal model, but you’ve got to treat the health and well-being of the athletes at least as much as the regular students. So if a school doesn’t reopen, then they’re not going to be playing sports. It’s really that simple.”

https://sports.yahoo.com/ncaa-...ampus-162457332.html

I didn't know about this. I wonder if Mark Emmert does. Seems like a fine line between training and playing real games.

One of the main points Emmert made is that he does not envision a scenario where football or other sports can take place if students cannot return to their respective campuses.

“All of the Division I commissioners and every president that I’ve talked to is in clear agreement: If you don’t have students on campus, you don’t have student-athletes on campus,” Emmert said. “That doesn’t mean it has to be up and running in the full normal model, but you’ve got to treat the health and well-being of the athletes at least as much as the regular students. So if a school doesn’t reopen, then they’re not going to be playing sports. It’s really that simple.”

https://sports.yahoo.com/ncaa-...ampus-162457332.html

It's the opinion of many, perhaps not outright that players are better off being on campus than returning home.

That was very evident in Trevor Lawrence's plea that alot of the guys were more at risk by going home as opposed to being on campus, where they would eat better, have better medical care.

As well as coaches keeping their jobs.

Of course that was before the Big 10 woosed out.

 

 

Last edited by TPM
@fenwaysouth posted:

TerribleBPTHrower,

In addition to RipkenFans post, there are a handful of Ivy commits who don't care to publically share their commitment or simply forgot to post to PG because they've moved on to other things.   I've known a quite a few recruits like this including my son.   In my experience, PG  has never been a great source for "telling the full story" with Ivy commits.

The last sentence would have been just as correct had you left off the last 3 words. 

@RJM posted:

This article is based on investment advising in the future. It analyzes how the public views covid and its effect on the economy. I believe the story is relevant to how college and college sports are being handled this fall. I’ll skip the partisan prelude I provided on Facebook.

They blinded us from science -  FrankinTempleton

https://us.beyondbullsandbears...ded-us-from-science/

Very good article. One of the better ones I have read. 

@RJM posted:

This article is based on investment advising in the future. It analyzes how the public views covid and its effect on the economy. I believe the story is relevant to how college and college sports are being handled this fall. I’ll skip the partisan prelude I provided on Facebook.

They blinded us from science -  FrankinTempleton

https://us.beyondbullsandbears...ded-us-from-science/

I have believed the takeaway from the article for some time, but it is the first time I have seen it backed up so concisely. 

I too agree with the basic premise that college-aged kids are not at high risk with coronavirus.  I wish that all colleges had opened campus with online classes, all sports were being played, let students do what they want, and have large wards to take care of those who get sick (and keep the vulnerable at home).  What has happened and is happening with colleges is a disaster.

This article is about consumer confidence, but it is simplistic when it blames the lack of confidence "on politics."  Politics is about persuasion; a good leader is someone who, in a crisis, can persuade large majorities to take some action for the common good.  We are all still taking our shoes off at airport security, even though we may not have agreed with the political party of the president whose administration determined that.  In the case of coronavirus, there are state and local leaders, of both parties, who have effectively persuaded people in their states to take actions to mitigate coronavirus.  However, consumer confidence is still low, as many surveys show.  Why is that?  You cannot say it is "just" politics, you have to ask, why, in a crisis, are some leaders not able to persuade a majority of people to take certain actions?  It's a big failure of leadership.

The longterm effects from Covid for those younger than 55, even those with little to no symptoms, are not well known but are potentially problematic...

An article written from a business point of view is going to skew much differently than articles written by scientists.

Google is not your friend when it comes to scientific and medical matters.  Scientists are....

How does opening a college increase the death toll? Herd immunity happens at around 20%. If young healthy people become infected it actually protects the people that are at the most risk.

 

A few of the young people will die.  Not many, granted.  They interact in the community, though, they don’t teach themselves or prepare all of their food themselves.  There are professors, custodians, food service workers, campus police/security, advisors, teaching assistants, maintenance people, coaches, support staff, counselors, training staff, strength coaches just on campus.  Then there are all the off-campus parties, restaurants, bars, etc

It is an extremely contagious disease.  The young people that get infected can still spread it to others, even if Asymptomatic.

Even if you eliminate the off campus stuff, if you just let Covid run rampant on campuses, it will infect the people I named above, and more, and then those people will bring it home to their families, and those they interact with in the community.  That will increase the death toll.

Fortunately, it appears that most of the University Presidents are intelligent enough to grasp that the situation goes much deeper than simply “young people are extremely unlikely to die from it”

Eventually we will get stronger leadership nationwide, with more widespread contact tracing, and testing.  More than likely we’ll be in a Nationwide lockdown/quarantine from late January through mid March.  Hopefully we can come out of that with some intelligent approaches to re-opening, along with hopefully better treatments, therapeutics and maybe even a vaccine that works.

Last edited by 3and2Fastball

Meant to add:  we are averaging 30,000 dead, nationwide, per month due to Covid.  Opening up colleges will only increase that death toll.   

Increasing the death toll will cause more economic disaster.

People who look for simple solutions to complex situations are not the type of leaders you want to follow in a crisis.

The death toll has no impact at all on the economy.  It's a rounding error.  You can argue that the deaths are a tragedy, but they don't affect the economy.   And the vast majority of these deaths are avoidable if older people simply stayed home and quarantined themselves. Keeping things closed is what is damaging to the economy, people's livelihoods, general health and emotional well being. 

My son is now on campus and officially covid negative.  Classes start tomorrow but the school is having the first week of classes online until students have two consecutive negative covid tests.   Only two of his classes are hybrid too.  His college kicked students off campus yesterday.  Anyone who did not follow group gathering protocols was sent  home for the semester and this was just the third day of four days of move ins.   I believe a few baseball players got caught up in that too, not my son however.   Can you imagine if you sent your Freshman to campus to play baseball and got a call a few days later to come to pick him up and he's now home for the fall due to violating policy?   I think these schools suspending kids for the semester are doing the right thing and we will see more of it.  Warn your college students! 

I am confident that most colleges will stick with kids on campus this fall.  Excited for college football and NFL soon too.   Most importantly am excited for my son to get on the diamond with teammates in a few weeks. 

Last edited by Gunner Mack Jr.
@Smitty28 posted:

The death toll has no impact at all on the economy.  It's a rounding error.  You can argue that the deaths are a tragedy, but they don't affect the economy.   And the vast majority of these deaths are avoidable if older people simply stayed home and quarantined themselves. Keeping things closed is what is damaging to the economy, people's livelihoods, general health and emotional well being. 

I think your opinion is reasonable, but I don’t think the numbers support your conclusions.
Where would you put the “old people” cut-off?
If at 65, the 45-65 group has been hospitalized at >20%. There are 60M people in that group. If 25% of those people get the virus, and 20% of that group is hospitalized, that’s 3M people.
There are 1M hospital beds in the US.
If that scenario started to happen, many in that age group would probably join the self-quarantine. Now you’re talking about 70M people (45 and older) staying home. Many not able to work. Not eating in restaurants, not flying, not staying in hotels, not buying new cars, not going to gyms, etc.
I don’t have a better idea, but I can’t envision any age based quarantine that doesn’t have a significant impacts to the economy.

The longterm effects from Covid for those younger than 55, even those with little to no symptoms, are not well known but are potentially problematic...

An article written from a business point of view is going to skew much differently than articles written by scientists.

Google is not your friend when it comes to scientific and medical matters.  Scientists are....

I don't like getting involved in these, but...what's the solution? We're 6 months in, we're not going to know what the long term effects are until well...long term. 

Trust the science, trust the science, trust the science. 

Science: It's not an issue unless you have preexisting conditions and/or are over a certain age. 

So do we trust the science or not?

I can take something seriously and do my part to try to limit as many unnecessary deaths as possible, I can also question the narrative surrounding it as well. 

@PABaseball posted:

I don't like getting involved in these, but...what's the solution? We're 6 months in, we're not going to know what the long term effects are until well...long term. 

Trust the science, trust the science, trust the science. 

Science: It's not an issue unless you have preexisting conditions and/or are over a certain age. 

So do we trust the science or not?

I can take something seriously and do my part to try to limit as many unnecessary deaths as possible, I can also question the narrative surrounding it as well. 

Yes. In addition infections have been steadily declining nationwide for a month now, with deaths lagging infections by approximately 3 weeks. Looking at every other qeographical area that has been through this we should be approaching (near) zero for both infections and deaths within 3 months.

 

I am confident that most colleges will stick with kids on campus this fall.  Excited for college football and NFL soon too.   Most importantly am excited for my son to get on the diamond with teammates in a few weeks. 

Some NFL teams shutting down practice due to testing irregularities.

I am in agreement that those that don't comply to the universities group gatherings should be sent home.

 

Unless we keep this thread specifically related to college baseball and covid, it will spiral quickly and turn into a carbon copy of the others before it.  I know it is difficult as covid is at the forefront of our lives, but we have already exhausted and beat the hell out of the horse that is our varying POV's and there are no significant changes at this point.

@cabbagedad posted:

Unless we keep this thread specifically related to college baseball and covid, it will spiral quickly and turn into a carbon copy of the others before it.  I know it is difficult as covid is at the forefront of our lives, but we have already exhausted and beat the hell out of the horse that is our varying POV's and there are no significant changes at this point.

I agree. I just deleted my last post.

Guilty.  But I did ask, earlier, whether D1 schools are having fall practices - sounds like some are, where the campuses are still open.  Did closed campuses like UNC cancel spring sport (baseball) practices, even though they are moving ahead with football and the fall sports?

I read about some school that was mostly closing its dorms, but allowing some, including athletes, to remain - I found that vaguely offensive, although it didn't specify whether that was fall or all sports.

Cabbagedad, I hope that you are not affected by the fires, and I hope our other California posters are safe.

Herd immunity does not occur until around 60 - 70% of the population is infected. They are finding that some people who had covid and donated antibodies are now several months later antibody negative. So herd immunity may never be reached with this disease.

That 60-70 percent number is/was a guess based on a snapshot of information.  There could be 20-50 percent of the population with cross-reactive T cell immunity from exposure to other viruses. That will impact the herd immunity threshold significantly. 

 

Also, antibody negative does not mean someone has lost long term immunity as "memory" B cells and T cells remain.  When these memory cells recognize the virus they produce new antibodies as needed.  There are patients from the SARS outbreak 17 years ago that still have T cells for that virus.

Sons school has yet to have any team meetings, practices, workouts or anything. No small group stuff, either. They are to work out on their own. Athletic work out room is not open to them. No dates have been announced for practices, meetings etc. They have been tested at least once. If one positive test, the kid and his roommates are strictly quarantined for two weeks. They are required to wear their masks at all times outside their room and to not gather in groups.

Lot's of peer pressure to "not be that guy".

I think your opinion is reasonable, but I don’t think the numbers support your conclusions.
Where would you put the “old people” cut-off?
If at 65, the 45-65 group has been hospitalized at >20%. There are 60M people in that group. If 25% of those people get the virus, and 20% of that group is hospitalized, that’s 3M people.
There are 1M hospital beds in the US.
If that scenario started to happen, many in that age group would probably join the self-quarantine. Now you’re talking about 70M people (45 and older) staying home. Many not able to work. Not eating in restaurants, not flying, not staying in hotels, not buying new cars, not going to gyms, etc.
I don’t have a better idea, but I can’t envision any age based quarantine that doesn’t have a significant impacts to the economy.

Well, per RJM's article, 92% of the deaths so far have been people older than 55.  So something like 15k people under 55 have died from Covid, or <0.005% of the population.  To me this risk level is acceptable to carry on, particularly if we implement masks, social distancing, sanitizing classrooms, daily temperature tests, zoom lectures for large classes, etc.  I'm sure we'll see cases, but hopefully people begin to have a more measured reaction to a case and not equate it with a death sentence.

@TPM posted:

Some NFL teams shutting down practice due to testing irregularities.

I am in agreement that those that don't comply to the universities group gatherings should be sent home.

 

I actually hadn't seen the NFL news but see it now.  I have no doubt NFL will be playing, however. There is too much money at stake.  I wouldn't worry about the ebbs and flows of Covid news re: NFL.

Son's school just released a covid dashboard.  No students who arrived on campus Thursday and Friday tested positive and no professors or staff have tested positive this entire month (testing began early August for them).   More students arrived yesterday and the last batch today.   If they can get them all on with just a few students into quarantine and then have the first week online they should have a very good chance at sticking around for fall.  That means fall baseball practices which are key for all but especially for Freshman.

@TPM posted:

It's the opinion of many, perhaps not outright that players are better off being on campus than returning home.

That was very evident in Trevor Lawrence's plea that alot of the guys were more at risk by going home as opposed to being on campus, where they would eat better, have better medical care.

As well as coaches keeping their jobs.

Of course that was before the Big 10 woosed out.

 

 

Everyone is better off. Once football was canceled, young  people had zero reason to comply with any of the so called mandates. Right or wrong, this is happening. 

@PABaseball posted:

I don't like getting involved in these, but...what's the solution? We're 6 months in, we're not going to know what the long term effects are until well...long term. 

Trust the science, trust the science, trust the science. 

Science: It's not an issue unless you have preexisting conditions and/or are over a certain age. 

So do we trust the science or not?

I can take something seriously and do my part to try to limit as many unnecessary deaths as possible, I can also question the narrative surrounding it as well. 

You can’t trust science long term. Science is constantly changing. Actually, it’s scientific discovery that changes. Look how much change there has been on COVID since November.

Guilty.  But I did ask, earlier, whether D1 schools are having fall practices - sounds like some are, where the campuses are still open.  Did closed campuses like UNC cancel spring sport (baseball) practices, even though they are moving ahead with football and the fall sports?

I read about some school that was mostly closing its dorms, but allowing some, including athletes, to remain - I found that vaguely offensive, although it didn't specify whether that was fall or all sports.

Cabbagedad, I hope that you are not affected by the fires, and I hope our other California posters are safe.

Thanks Another,

For now, we are lucky again... no fire threats in our immediate area but smoke in the air was really bad the last three days.  So many breakouts in the state, we are having a hard time keeping up with what friends to check in with.  One of my Florida Gulf friends checked in with us.  I thanked him and said something like "hope things are more normal back your way".  That's when I learned that there are two hurricanes possibly headed that way.  Geeeeezz.

With the baseball/covid angle, son drove back across the country to arrive for his new coaching gig last weekend, expecting to be presented with final options for housing, begin with private lessons, and begin with at least small group team conditioning/workouts.  None of that has happened.  Many of the students have decided to live off campus and have eaten up the available housing.  All baseball/conditioning activities are on hold.  So, he is living out of his car (still packed with all his belongings and his girlfriend), doing various mini road trips meeting up with former teammates, coaches, friends, etc.  During his cross-country trip, he took pics of himself and said girlfriend standing in the middle of an empty Bourbon St. in New Orleans and an empty Broadway in Nashville.  Just more Cabbage adventures 

Hopin' for the best for all of ya!

Last edited by cabbagedad
@cabbagedad posted:

Thanks Another,

For now, we are lucky again... no fire threats in our immediate area but smoke in the air was really bad the last three days.  So many breakouts in the state, we are having a hard time keeping up with what friends to check in with.

With the baseball/covid angle, son drove back across the country to arrive for his new coaching gig last weekend, expecting to be presented with final options for housing, begin with private lessons, and begin with at least small group team conditioning/workouts.  None of that has happened.  Many of the students have decided to live off campus and have eaten up the available housing.  All baseball/conditioning activities are on hold.  So, he is living out of his car (still packed with all his belongings and his girlfriend), doing various mini road trips meeting up with former teammates, coaches, friends, etc.  During his cross-country trip, he took pics of himself and said girlfriend standing in the middle of an empty Bourbon St. in New Orleans and an empty Broadway in Nashville.  Just more Cabbage adventures 

Hopin' for the best for all of ya!

That's really neat!

@cabbagedad posted:

Thanks Another,

For now, we are lucky again... no fire threats in our immediate area but smoke in the air was really bad the last three days.  So many breakouts in the state, we are having a hard time keeping up with what friends to check in with.  One of my Florida Gulf friends checked in with us.  I thanked him and said something like "hope things are more normal back your way".  That's when I learned that there are two hurricanes possibly headed that way.  Geeeeezz.

With the baseball/covid angle, son drove back across the country to arrive for his new coaching gig last weekend, expecting to be presented with final options for housing, begin with private lessons, and begin with at least small group team conditioning/workouts.  None of that has happened.  Many of the students have decided to live off campus and have eaten up the available housing.  All baseball/conditioning activities are on hold.  So, he is living out of his car (still packed with all his belongings and his girlfriend), doing various mini road trips meeting up with former teammates, coaches, friends, etc.  During his cross-country trip, he took pics of himself and said girlfriend standing in the middle of an empty Bourbon St. in New Orleans and an empty Broadway in Nashville.  Just more Cabbage adventures 

Hopin' for the best for all of ya!

I’ve been to New Orleans several times. It’s a popular conference destination. I’ve stood at one end of Bourbon Street wondering how many people would be on Bourbon Street if everyone who was there just to see how many people are on Bourbon Street went home. Now I know! 

My daughter celebrated her second birthday on Bourbon Street ... at 2pm. We had lunch on Toulouse Street.

Guilty.  But I did ask, earlier, whether D1 schools are having fall practices - sounds like some are, where the campuses are still open.  Did closed campuses like UNC cancel spring sport (baseball) practices, even though they are moving ahead with football and the fall sports?

I read about some school that was mostly closing its dorms, but allowing some, including athletes, to remain - I found that vaguely offensive, although it didn't specify whether that was fall or all sports.

Cabbagedad, I hope that you are not affected by the fires, and I hope our other California posters are safe.

Once school starts, it will be entirely online with the exception of labs and nursing program. Athletes are remaining on campus and practicing as if there will be a season come Feb. Everybody is living off campus or commuting except for freshman who will be in dorms. 

Football was cancelled. Football team is still practicing as well. 

@RoadRunner posted:

Everyone is better off. Once football was canceled, young  people had zero reason to comply with any of the so called mandates. Right or wrong, this is happening. 

Football has not been cancelled.  The REAL conferences that determine the National Championships (SEC/ACC) are still playing.    I have to do something to swing this back from Covid back to sports.  Even a good sports argument is better than any covid argument. 

So who wins the National Championship?  SEC or Clemson?

 

I remain extremely hopeful for a 2021 College Baseball season.  I think it can, and will, happen.

Hoping so also. Seeing some of the larger states and other areas of the country play ball this summer, hoping that provides some feedback to those making decisions in the college ranks.

But outside of another large wave next spring, what would be reason to not have a baseball season? Someone asked me this and I didn't have a real answer for them. If we have large national tournaments happening in states like Florida, Georgia, and Texas and there are PG, PBR, Future Stars, Area Code, and other similar type of events going on across the country and we haven't heard of any mass outbreak due to those events, what would cause the 2021 season to get cancelled? The travel associated with college baseball? 

I know nothing is normal and not a whole lot of things don't make sense right now, but just trying to figure out what the thought process is. One of the ones that still blows my mind is canceling golf seasons. Golf has been the one sport that really never shut down through all this but fall college golf seasons are being canceled. Don't get that.

How many teams do you think tank it this year to try to get him? I bet there will be at least a few teams that start 0-6 or 0-7

Oddly enough bad teams in the NFL have already drafted QBs in the past year or two. Looking at projected standings, it's possible he won't be needed by any of the worst 10 teams. Somebody would likely have to trade up to the 1 or 2 spot to get him. Could see TB, NO, or Denver going that route. 

@ARCEKU21 posted:

Hoping so also. Seeing some of the larger states and other areas of the country play ball this summer, hoping that provides some feedback to those making decisions in the college ranks.

But outside of another large wave next spring, what would be reason to not have a baseball season? Someone asked me this and I didn't have a real answer for them. If we have large national tournaments happening in states like Florida, Georgia, and Texas and there are PG, PBR, Future Stars, Area Code, and other similar type of events going on across the country and we haven't heard of any mass outbreak due to those events, what would cause the 2021 season to get cancelled? The travel associated with college baseball? 

I know nothing is normal and not a whole lot of things don't make sense right now, but just trying to figure out what the thought process is. One of the ones that still blows my mind is canceling golf seasons. Golf has been the one sport that really never shut down through all this but fall college golf seasons are being canceled. Don't get that.

My fear is that some conferences will play and others will not.  This will cause the NCAA to cancel the CWS.  We really need the NCAA basketball tournament to happen.  The NCAA needs it to happen and so do the schools.  If that gets cancelled, then college baseball is probably in big trouble. 

@ARCEKU21 posted:

Hoping so also. Seeing some of the larger states and other areas of the country play ball this summer, hoping that provides some feedback to those making decisions in the college ranks.

But outside of another large wave next spring, what would be reason to not have a baseball season? Someone asked me this and I didn't have a real answer for them. If we have large national tournaments happening in states like Florida, Georgia, and Texas and there are PG, PBR, Future Stars, Area Code, and other similar type of events going on across the country and we haven't heard of any mass outbreak due to those events, what would cause the 2021 season to get cancelled? The travel associated with college baseball? 

I know nothing is normal and not a whole lot of things don't make sense right now, but just trying to figure out what the thought process is. One of the ones that still blows my mind is canceling golf seasons. Golf has been the one sport that really never shut down through all this but fall college golf seasons are being canceled. Don't get that.

College baseball is not a revenue generating sport (with the exception of SEC schools,  some ACC, and a few other outliers). College baseball (and other spring sports) are dependent on football and basketball to generate the revenue to fund their seasons. If football & basketball aren’t played (or the schedule is reduced) the revenue drop will impact the entire athletic department, and this is already happening. Schools that have cancelled football are forecasting their athletic budget problems and making cuts - cancelling seasons in other sports and even eliminating programs. PAC12 & BIG10 made colossal mistake IMO by pulling the plug early and expecting other P5 conferences to follow suit. 

I believe the best thing that can happen is for the SEC, ACC, and B12 to be able to play a full football season then the others will regret their decisions and have to jump on board full blast.  If they play a championship game this fall for football, then baseball will be ok.  The problem for some of the schools is that if football doesn't play then they will not be able to afford for baseball to play.  But for those that football does play they will have the money for baseball and the NCAA will be in trouble trying to figure out what to do.  If the big boys play, then the CWS will go on with or without some of the schools. 

@PABaseball posted:

Oddly enough bad teams in the NFL have already drafted QBs in the past year or two. Looking at projected standings, it's possible he won't be needed by any of the worst 10 teams. Somebody would likely have to trade up to the 1 or 2 spot to get him. Could see TB, NO, or Denver going that route. 

I think you are right but what happens if they don't play? Or what  happens if there is no college football?

@PABaseball posted:

Oddly enough bad teams in the NFL have already drafted QBs in the past year or two. Looking at projected standings, it's possible he won't be needed by any of the worst 10 teams. Somebody would likely have to trade up to the 1 or 2 spot to get him. Could see TB, NO, or Denver going that route. 

The team with the best potential to tank and most likely to tank for Lawrence would be the Jags. If Stafford gets injured again the Lions would be a contender to tank. The Panthers would throw Bridgewater under the bus in a second for Lawrence. 

I'd assume that the difference between summer travel baseball and college is that (a) summer travel is almost entirely outside, whereas colleges have weight rooms, indoor facilities, dorms, dining halls, group travel, etc. that they are more worried about, and (b) summer travel teams are probably not dealing with the kinds of liability claims that colleges are, at least for scholarship athletes who are, in fact, getting tuition paid for in return for playing a sport (or putting themselves at risk), which is a very murky thing, as we all know.

@RJM posted:

The team with the best potential to tank and most likely to tank for Lawrence would be the Jags. If Stafford gets injured again the Lions would be a contender to tank. The Panthers would throw Bridgewater under the bus in a second for Lawrence. 

The Jags were the team I was thinking that would take him, but they were projected to be the 11th pick by the site I looked at. I think they'll stink, I just don't know if they'll stink enough to get a top 5 pick. Lions were another, but Stafford has 4 more years under contract and he's the least of their problems. Panthers could go 3-13, they could be a playoff team. 

Tanking might not be enough considering the way Miami and Cincinnati play on a regular basis. Unless the Jags end up with the first overall pick, I would expect it to take a very big trade to get to the 1 spot. 

@PABaseball posted:

The Jags were the team I was thinking that would take him, but they were projected to be the 11th pick by the site I looked at. I think they'll stink, I just don't know if they'll stink enough to get a top 5 pick. Lions were another, but Stafford has 4 more years under contract and he's the least of their problems. Panthers could go 3-13, they could be a playoff team. 

Tanking might not be enough considering the way Miami and Cincinnati play on a regular basis. Unless the Jags end up with the first overall pick, I would expect it to take a very big trade to get to the 1 spot. 

Miami has Tau and Rosen, so they better not tank! 

@PABaseball posted:

The Jags were the team I was thinking that would take him, but they were projected to be the 11th pick by the site I looked at. I think they'll stink, I just don't know if they'll stink enough to get a top 5 pick. Lions were another, but Stafford has 4 more years under contract and he's the least of their problems. Panthers could go 3-13, they could be a playoff team. 

Tanking might not be enough considering the way Miami and Cincinnati play on a regular basis. Unless the Jags end up with the first overall pick, I would expect it to take a very big trade to get to the 1 spot. 

Stafford has been so injury prone I believe the Lions would trade him and eat a good portion if his contract. 

Great letter to the editor from Notre Dame professors.   Well written.  Hey if Notre Dame wins the national championship does that count for the ACC? I am guessing yes.  I will be pulling for Trevor Lawrence and Clemson (as an ACC undergrad myself) but if not them I am partial to Georgia or Auburn.

https://ndsmcobserver.com/2020...lculating-the-risks/

"national championship" with 2 conferences playing...that is funny. 

I would agree Old School if any of the other teams that are not playing were relevant.  The teams that want to compete are the ones that are trying to make it work and if it does work, the others will look irrelevant. 

I think baseball happens if football happens.  If football happens, then basketball will happen, then baseball will happen.  If football crashes then no basketball and probably no baseball.   I still hold that the hysteria goes away after November 3rd.  It doesn't mean the virus goes away but the hysteria does and we move on to some other problem.  That depends on which one gets elected President.

@PitchingFan posted:

I would agree Old School if any of the other teams that are not playing were relevant.  The teams that want to compete are the ones that are trying to make it work and if it does work, the others will look irrelevant. 

I think baseball happens if football happens.  If football happens, then basketball will happen, then baseball will happen.  If football crashes then no basketball and probably no baseball.   I still hold that the hysteria goes away after November 3rd.  It doesn't mean the virus goes away but the hysteria does and we move on to some other problem.  That depends on which one gets elected President.

Covid will be around for awhile, it really doesnt care who will be president in Nov 3, so lets not bring that into the discussion.

Also, I am pretty sure most 18, 19 , 20 year olds focusing on winning, really don't care, they just want to play, regardless of the sport.  

It is a tremendous undertaking that these programs have taken.  Hearing about preparing a baseball team first hand, I can't imagine how difficult it is for football. The players arrived back on campus months ago.  We don't know what went wrong for some and not others.

I agree with Gunner, you dont play, you dont win, don't take a National Championship away from the programs that made it work. The Big 10 and Pac 12 should have thought long and hard last March how they would approach the situation and not have it unravel so quickly. The players made demands. Couldn't blame them, maybe things will change.

Clemson and Trevor Lawrence are gonna win anyway!

Go Tigers!!!

JMO

How many championships have been won by other conferences in the past 10 years? 

I am born and raised smack dab in the middle of Columbus and Ann Arbor.  I grew up with the ten years war between Woody and Bo being "The Game" every year.  As much as I want the big10 and midwest to matter, I deal in facts.   The fact is no one outside the SEC and ACC, has won a CFP game since OSU won it all back in the 2014 season.  Clemson is the only ACC team to have won a game. 

We can pretty safely get a champion with the teams playing.  

@Pedaldad posted:

I am born and raised smack dab in the middle of Columbus and Ann Arbor.  I grew up with the ten years war between Woody and Bo being "The Game" every year.  As much as I want the big10 and midwest to matter, I deal in facts.   The fact is no one outside the SEC and ACC, has won a CFP game since OSU won it all back in the 2014 season.  Clemson is the only ACC team to have won a game. 

We can pretty safely get a champion with the teams playing.  

Hmmmm, there seems to be a team you are leaving out from the ACC....

Hmmmm, there seems to be a team you are leaving out from the ACC...

No no one was left out.  I wrote College Football Playoff(CFP), and didn't mention BCS.  The CFP began in the 2014 season.   Ohio state and Oregon each won games that year.  No one other than the SEC and Clemson have won games in the last 5 College Football Playoffs.  FSU lost their only College Football Playoff game, badly.  Miami has never been there. 

 

Last edited by Pedaldad
@Pedaldad posted:

TPM you are usually very good on this stuff.  I didn't write BCS, I wrote CFP, it began in 2014.  Neither Miami or FSU have won CFP games.  Clemson and OSU have been the only teams outside the SEC to win more than 1 game,  Oregon won only one in 2014/15.  The rest is all SEC.

My bad. Not as good at football as baseball. What was I thinking!

Doesn't matter if B10 tries to get back into the season. Clemson wins!

Seriously, I feel for the guys who want to get drafted.  This whole thing is such a mess. 

 

 

@Pedaldad posted:

No no one was left out.  I wrote College Football Playoff(CFP), and didn't mention BCS.  The CFP began in the 2014 season.   Ohio state and Oregon each won games that year.  No one other than the SEC and Clemson have won games in the last 5 College Football Playoffs.  FSU lost their only College Football Playoff game, badly.  Miami has never been there. 

 

You are correct. I stated championships in the past 10 years and you switched to CFP and I didn’t catch that. Either way, I still think the teams should play it out. I wish the B1G were better as I despise the SEC. It would be nice to see a little change every couple of years. 

@PitchingFan posted:

The rules that are put into place are silly at times.  The person who tested positive can  be set free at 10 days while the secondary quarantine guys/gals have to stay in quarantine for 14 days.  How can you make the ones who did not test positive stay longer than the ones who did? 

It would appear they are factoring in an incubation period for those exposed but not testing positive.  It is possible to have been exposed and the viral load has not reached a detectable level.

@22and25 is correct. Incubation period is, from all Indications, believed to be 2-14 days. So exposure to a positive-tested person means you need 14 days of quarantine.

And if you test positive, it’s not just 10 days, then you’re good. It’s 10 days from when symptoms first appeared, PLUS no fever for 24 hrs w/o use of meds to reduce it, PLUS symptoms are abating (other than loss of taste/smell). 

@PitchingFan posted:

The weird part is none had symptoms, either those that tested positive or those that were apartment mates.  It is just weird that the ones who tested positive are free men before the ones who tested negative. 

I wonder how the new CDC information out this weekend will affect college athletics?

PitchingFan we are hearing nothing about this new information from the CDC in the media and I doubt we will..if we do it will be spun and twisted.  This news is HUGE and should change entirely the way we deal with covid 19...no wonder Sweeden is doing so well.

@PitchingFan posted:

The weird part is none had symptoms, either those that tested positive or those that were apartment mates.  It is just weird that the ones who tested positive are free men before the ones who tested negative. 

I wonder how the new CDC information out this weekend will affect college athletics?

Thats the problem, you don't have to have symptoms. 

What new CDC information out this weekend? 

 

@TPM It’s the 6% crap. For some reason, people in certain circles believe that if you catch COVID-19 and die, it shouldn’t count as a COVID-19 death if you have any other conditions that may have contributed to your death, either preexisting (say, COPD) or that you caught once the COVID-19 infection was in place (say, pneumonia). The claim is that if only 6% of COVID deaths tracked by CDC died of “COVID only”, then that means that it as deadly as the XXX (insert boogeyman) is making it out to be. 

Nothing has changed, unfortunately. 

@Senna posted:

@TPM It’s the 6% crap. For some reason, people in certain circles believe that if you catch COVID-19 and die, it shouldn’t count as a COVID-19 death if you have any other conditions that may have contributed to your death, either preexisting (say, COPD) or that you caught once the COVID-19 infection was in place (say, pneumonia). The claim is that if only 6% of COVID deaths tracked by CDC died of “COVID only”, then that means that it as deadly as the XXX (insert boogeyman) is making it out to be. 

Nothing has changed, unfortunately. 

Well, that's one interpretation.....

Is this thread about to go off the rails?  CDC is just stating facts.   Too many Americans have co-morbitities of course.   

Did anyone see the NY Times article yesterday that says the Covid PCR test is likely too sensitive? "The standard tests are diagnosing huge numbers of people who maybe carrying relatively insignificant amounts of he virus.  Most of these people are not likely to be contagious."    The article was about the need for more widespread, rapid testing which makes sense but I found that interesting.  

Sons school has over 5,000 tests and just 3 positives from students - not sure if its the same person testing multiple times or 2 or 3 total people but amazing result.  

I don't wholly buy into the 6% being the qualifier but they did make a change.  I just have a problem with the numbers being excellerated.  How can a person who dies in a wreck or dies of cancer or a heart attack be a Covid death?  If it fits into the main Covid qualifiers then maybe but if they have large pre-existing conditions then Covid was a minimal factor not THE reason.  If you are referring to people in certain circles, those of us who want the truth to be told, then put me in that circle.  I'm tired of the lies that are being told to put people in fear and make bad decisions.  It is no different than saying that certain circles believe that everyone who died in the past 6 months died of Covid whether they ever tested positive or not.  If it was not THE main factor of their death then they did not die of Covid.  That is no different than a person who has cancer dying in a car wreck.  That is not a cancer death.  Just give us the truth, not your agenda.  Be the medical professionals that you are supposed to be is my statement to the medical community. 

I posted this on Facebook, and so I'll post it here, too:

From the CDC site:
Comorbidities

...

Table 3 shows the types of health conditions and contributing causes mentioned in conjunction with deaths involving coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). For 6% of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death. The number of deaths with each condition or cause is shown for all deaths and by age groups. For data on comorbidities, https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm…
6% of the deaths where COVID-19 is the only cause mentioned equals (out of 182,149 deaths as of 1:02 PM 8/30/2020) is a grand total of 10,929. That means that 171,221 had underlying issues that contributed to their passing. All tragic deaths, and may God be with them all. The greatest number of deaths were in people over 55, especially in people over 65. But the hysteria created by the media is worse than the facts bear out. Pay attention to your favorite news outlet to see if they cover this story.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/...9LnxPNScKbEkmFS4FrK0

 For data on comorbidities, https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm…

6% of the deaths where COVID-19 is the only cause mentioned equals (out of 182,149 deaths as of 1:02 PM 8/30/2020) is a grand total of 10,929. That means that 171,221 had underlying issues that contributed to their passing. All tragic deaths, and may God be with them all. The greatest number of deaths were in people over 55, especially in people over 65. But the hysteria created by the media is worse than the facts bear out. Pay attention to your favorite news outlet to see if they cover this story.

Sorry, but this is a ridiculous interpretation.  Comorbidities contribute to death in all sorts of medical issues.  Some of these are entirely internal:  if you are overweight with diabetes and have a heart attack, you're more likely to die.  That's all within your body.  Does that mean you didn't die of a heart attack?  Or, some are entirely unrelated, as in PitchingFan's example - if you have cancer and die in a car accident, the cancer was irrelevant.

In the case of COVID, the coronavirus comes from outside, and yes, your co-morbidities make it more likely you will die.  If there were no coronavirus, you wouldn't die of COVID.  It's pretty obvious.

Since well over 50% of the US population has some kind of co-morbidity* that makes COVID serious and potentially fatal, what is even the point of this kind of analysis?  To say we only have to protect the people with co-morbidities?   That's a lot of people.  And that is why 70+% of people in this country are seriously worried about this disease.

Another thread derailed - although this one was about COVID anyway.

*40% of Americans over the age of 20 are obese.  10% of the US population have diabetes, 33% have high blood pressure, 5% have COPD, 8% have asthma, 49% have heart disease, 15% have kidney disease.  13% are over the age of 65.  Who on this site is not high-risk? 

Sorry, but this is a ridiculous interpretation.  Comorbidities contribute to death in all sorts of medical issues.  Some of these are entirely internal:  if you are overweight with diabetes and have a heart attack, you're more likely to die.  That's all within your body.  Does that mean you didn't die of a heart attack?  Or, some are entirely unrelated, as in PitchingFan's example - if you have cancer and die in a car accident, the cancer was irrelevant.

In the case of COVID, the coronavirus comes from outside, and yes, your co-morbidities make it more likely you will die.  If there were no coronavirus, you wouldn't die of COVID.  It's pretty obvious.

Since well over 50% of the US population has some kind of co-morbidity* that makes COVID serious and potentially fatal, what is even the point of this kind of analysis?  To say we only have to protect the people with co-morbidities?   That's a lot of people.  And that is why 70+% of people in this country are seriously worried about this disease.

Another thread derailed - although this one was about COVID anyway.

*40% of Americans over the age of 20 are obese.  10% of the US population have diabetes, 33% have high blood pressure, 5% have COPD, 8% have asthma, 49% have heart disease, 15% have kidney disease.  13% are over the age of 65.  Who on this site is not high-risk? 

I disagree with your 70% are seriously worried about it. I know way more who view it more as an inconvenience than seriously worried about it. 

I posted this on Facebook, and so I'll post it here, too:

From the CDC site:
Comorbidities

...

Table 3 shows the types of health conditions and contributing causes mentioned in conjunction with deaths involving coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). For 6% of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death. The number of deaths with each condition or cause is shown for all deaths and by age groups. For data on comorbidities, https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm…
6% of the deaths where COVID-19 is the only cause mentioned equals (out of 182,149 deaths as of 1:02 PM 8/30/2020) is a grand total of 10,929. That means that 171,221 had underlying issues that contributed to their passing. All tragic deaths, and may God be with them all. The greatest number of deaths were in people over 55, especially in people over 65. But the hysteria created by the media is worse than the facts bear out. Pay attention to your favorite news outlet to see if they cover this story.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/...9LnxPNScKbEkmFS4FrK0

Crickets so far. Good news doesn’t pay the bills. 

@edcoach posted:

therefore protect the vulnerable and the weak...no need to shut down the country

I agree, and I have posted before that I think colleges should be open.

BUT . . . since 50% of the population is in the "vulnerable and weak" category, how exactly do we protect them?  Especially since most of those people live with others who might get infected and bring home the virus to them.  That seems to be the $50 million question. 

I disagree with your 70% are seriously worried about it. I know way more who view it more as an inconvenience than seriously worried about it. 

I'm only quoting polls.  Fox News poll from July 19 showed 86% of respondents being concerned about the virus spreading, 81% report wearing a mask all or most of the time when in public, 71% favoring a national mask-wearing order indoors, 59% favor a national stay-in-place order for everyone except essential workers, etc.  They haven't published a more recent poll on this issue.  I guess it comes down to your definition of "seriously concerned."

Those who are truly concerned should be staying home. I don’t view most people I see doing everyday things as “seriously concerned”. Just because you wear a mask doesn’t make you seriously concerned. 

There are people who are “seriously concerned” who take a lot of precautions and do everyday things. My grandmother is 92 and has asthma. She is seriously concerned and hasn’t left her house since February. She takes every precaution imaginable to avoid the Covid. She may not recover even with treatment. A ridiculously high number of people will recover with treatment. 

Iowa just shut down all athletics for a week. 93 positive tests among athletes last week with a positivity rate of 11.4%.

Here's the problem with "trusting the numbers" etc., at leasts in Iowa. I report the numbers for my county daily in my online newspaper. For the county, I pull them from the Department of Public Health. The way they track the numbers has changed repeatedly. 

Last week we found out that if you got tested in March and were negative, then tested again in August and were positive, it counted your positive test on the March number —  a problem when the governor says the positivity rate in your community determines if you do online or in person school. Then they decided that instead of counting antigen positive tests among "undetermined" they should be added into the overall number, which resulted in my county getting about 123 additional positive tests in a day — a big change in a place with just 772 positives since March.

The deaths for our county were 1, then 2, then 3, then 2, now 5. Hard to figure that one out, but then last night, the number of deaths in Iowa suddenly went down by more than 200 on their web site, then it went back up to more than it was originally.

I don't know who to believe any more, but I was interested to see this article that on the different in beliefs between Republicans and Democrats. Here's the full article, but I thought the paragraph below was key.https://www.niemanlab.org/2020...c255f034d2-396350581

Our research found that Democrats and Republicans held genuine but different beliefs, not just about values or policies, but about basic facts. 

In essence, differences are no longer really driven by politics, but are deeply ingrained in each of us. It's depressing, but explains a lot of the debate on COVID threads on this web site.

 

The difference in "facts and beliefs " between Republicans and Democrats is due to the fact that we no longer have a functioning news media in this country.  People get their news, on both sides, from infotainment outlets who peddle editorial commentary tuned to play in a specific echo chamber as actual news.  Objectivity is dead....

If you want to know what someone really thinks, check out what they said when no one was listening.

Back when no one was listening,  2001 thru 2019, planners didn't contemplate locking down entire societies for a virus such as this one.

Governments panicked in mid-March--and tossed the carefully prepared plans into the circular file-- after the publication of the Imperial College of London report.

NY Times, 3/17/20:

"American officials said the report, which projected up to 2.2 million deaths in the United States from such a spread, also influenced the White House to strengthen its measures to isolate members of the public."

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/0...college-johnson.html

Last edited by game7
@22and25 posted:

The difference in "facts and beliefs " between Republicans and Democrats is due to the fact that we no longer have a functioning news media in this country.  People get their news, on both sides, from infotainment outlets who peddle editorial commentary tuned to play in a specific echo chamber as actual news.  Objectivity is dead....

 

I don't think people are interested in real news, they want whatever fits their already established beliefs. That I think is part of the point of the study — people now believe so much in their core beliefs that no one can agree on any facts. It's a problem in trying to have a functioning society.

And objectivity never really lived. Thirty years ago my town had one newspaper published twice a week. On Mondays it published Republican editorials and on Wednesday it was Democratic. I sometimes think that might be the way to go.

40% of Americans over the age of 20 are obese.  10% of the US population have diabetes, 33% have high blood pressure, 5% have COPD, 8% have asthma, 49% have heart disease, 15% have kidney disease.  13% are over the age of 65.  Who on this site is not high-risk? 

A sad commentary on how many people don’t take care of themselves. A lot of it is lack of self discipline.

@Iowamom23 posted:

 

I don't think people are interested in real news, they want whatever fits their already established beliefs. That I think is part of the point of the study — people now believe so much in their core beliefs that no one can agree on any facts. It's a problem in trying to have a functioning society.

And objectivity never really lived. Thirty years ago my town had one newspaper published twice a week. On Mondays it published Republican editorials and on Wednesday it was Democratic. I sometimes think that might be the way to go.

IMO we are really underestimating how much the Information Revolution has altered society. The ability to curate one's own news feed and read and react to news immediately has destroyed the logic that used to govern political behavior: consume information usually from a center-left or center-right source, think about it for a while, discuss it with your friends, and then form and test an opinion. That now happens in under a minute, and the news sources are increasingly extreme b/c they're rewarded for extremism (clicks, likes, ad revenue). It's pretty interesting to think about imo. 

 

@Iowamom23 posted:

 

I don't think people are interested in real news, they want whatever fits their already established beliefs. That I think is part of the point of the study — people now believe so much in their core beliefs that no one can agree on any facts. It's a problem in trying to have a functioning society.

And objectivity never really lived. Thirty years ago my town had one newspaper published twice a week. On Mondays it published Republican editorials and on Wednesday it was Democratic. I sometimes think that might be the way to go.

A big problem is people disrespecting and shouting down anyone who disagrees with them. There would be a lot more communication if people responding to something they disagree with, “Why do you believe that to be true?”

I have a friend whose parents, his wife and he have received every paycheck from the government or government funding. Of course he believes in big government. It pays the bills. 

My father finished his career as part owner of a small company. I’ve owned small businesses for 36 years. I’m for less regulation and small government. It makes sense to anyone who owns a business.

My friend and I will never agree on big versus small government. So when we arrive there we back off ... because we’re friends. 

Last edited by RJM
@Iowamom23 posted:

 

I don't think people are interested in real news, they want whatever fits their already established beliefs. That I think is part of the point of the study — people now believe so much in their core beliefs that no one can agree on any facts. It's a problem in trying to have a functioning society.

And objectivity never really lived. Thirty years ago my town had one newspaper published twice a week. On Mondays it published Republican editorials and on Wednesday it was Democratic. I sometimes think that might be the way to go.

Hasn't this been the way of this whole mess?  Most only looking for opinions that reinforced their own. 

Still, you have to love it when people clamored about "going with the science" when there really was none.  Now that there really is some science and data, many of those same people reject the science as insignificant.

@22and25 posted:

Well, that's one interpretation.....

It is the right interpretation. Any other interpretation is incorrect. 

Here's the exact wording from the CDC on how death certificates are filled out. You can find it at https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/blue_form.pdf

"The cause-of-death section consists of two parts. Part I is for reporting a chain of events leading directly to death, with the immediate cause of death (the final disease, injury, or complication directly causing death) on Line a and the underlying cause of death (the disease or injury that initiated the chain of morbid events that led directly and inevitably to death) on the lowest used line.

Part II is for reporting all other significant diseases, conditions, or injuries that contributed to death but which did not result in the underlying cause of death given in Part I. The cause-of-death information should be YOUR best medical OPINION. A condition can be listed as “probable” even if it has not been definitively diagnosed."I

It works like this:

  • If an otherwise healthy person contracts COVID-19 and dies from it, and the examining doctor can find no other underlying illnesses that could have contributed to death, the decedent will have only an immediate cause of death listed, which would be COVID-19. That's the 6%.
  • If a person had a preexisting condition (say, had a partial lung removal), then contracted COVID-19 and died because their reduced lung capacity prevented them from recovering from COVID-19, then the immediate cause of death would be listed as COVID-19 (line 1 of Part I), with the partial lung removal being the primary underlying cause (bottom line of Part I).  These people are part of the 94%
    • A friend of mine had this exact issue, but fortunately survived after 3 weeks in ICU.
  • If a person contracts COVID-19, then, during the course of the infection, develops complications that ultimately take their life (say, ARDS), then the complications (ARDS) will be listed as the immediate cause of death (line 1 of Part I), with COVID-19 being listed as the primary underlying cause (bottom line of Part I). These people are also part of the 94%.

 

As for Part II, that's where all the other items go that contribute to the death. So items like obesity, smoking, etc. will go there. 

All of these deaths, no matter where COVID-19 is listed, are because of COVID-19, regrettably. 

If you don't understand it, here's something that may help, grim and regrettable as it may be:

Everyone knows that Chadwick Boseman died on Friday (rest in power). And you will undoubtedly read that he died of colon cancer. But what killed him wasn't necessarily the cancer in his colon. Rather, it was in all likelihood the spread of the cancer to the lymph nodes, and then on to other organs (such as the liver or pancreas). So while line 1 of Part I of his autopsy may list something such as liver failure as the immediate cause of death, the primary underlying cause will be colon cancer. Hence, he died because of colon cancer. 

People rarely die in a vacuum, and the death process is often complex as hell. And COVID-19 seems hellbent on finding new and innovative ways to challenge the body.

I hope this helps to explain why any other interpretation of the death statistics is incorrect, and why there is no smoking gun, nor light at the end of the tunnel in this CDC data. 

 

 

Senna, that was a lot of effort to try to be "right".  What you don't realize is that you simply proved the point many here have been making.  Covid has killed about 10,000 otherwise healthy people.  That is tragic no doubt but not worthy of continuing to lock down large segments of society.  The rest, according to the CDC, had on average 2.6 comorbidites.  Since you seem to have an interest in breaking down the CDC data for the rest of us to understand, perhaps you could tell us what those common comorbidites were and what segment of the population is most effected by them in general.  Here is a hint, the death rate by age will give you this answer.  5 to 40 year olds don't have hypertension, advanced cardiovascular disease and type II diabetes, etc in large numbers.  Those that do can take measures to isolate themselves until herd immunity or a vaccine.

Cancelling activities, sports and school for 5 to 40 year olds is not consistent with the data as we understand it today.  If they get Covid they will be fine if they even get sick at all.  

Last edited by 22and25

In my house, among the two parents we have 4 co-morbidities, and no, not because of lack of discipline.  So yes, the young people will be fine with covid, we just have to make sure they don't come into the same part of our house with us.  How exactly does that work with young kids?  Who maybe live with grandparents, too?  I think colleges should be open and playing sports.  We could put all the young kids into boarding schools and let them all live together, play sports, do whatever they want.  Or, maybe we should put the 50% of the adult population with co-morbidities in quarantine camps, and let everyone else do what they want.  But as long as all those K-12 kids are living with less-young people with risk factors, then your vision doesn't match with reality.

In my house, among the two parents we have 4 co-morbidities, and no, not because of lack of discipline.  So yes, the young people will be fine with covid, we just have to make sure they don't come into the same part of our house with us.  How exactly does that work with young kids?  Who maybe live with grandparents, too?  I think colleges should be open and playing sports.  We could put all the young kids into boarding schools and let them all live together, play sports, do whatever they want.  Or, maybe we should put the 50% of the adult population with co-morbidities in quarantine camps, and let everyone else do what they want.  But as long as all those K-12 kids are living with less-young people with risk factors, then your vision doesn't match with reality.

So keep your K-12 kids at home and isolated, it's a choice with easy accommodations that don't effect the millions of K-12 kids who live in a household with mid 40's and younger adults with no comorbidites.

That 50% of adults number you guys keep trotting out his heavily skewed toward the older population.

Last edited by 22and25

For those in serious search for the news, here’s a tip. It’s what I do every day multiple times. I keep 2 conservative leaning news sites and 2 liberal leaning sites up as 4 separate tabs on my iPad which is my main connection to the internet and news. If a story exists on all 4 sites, it’s news. Assuming you lean one way or the other, everything you’ll else you’ll find (largely hate) will either piss you off or make you happy - which is it’s sole intent. 

@DanJ posted:

For those in serious search for the news, here’s a tip. It’s what I do every day multiple times. I keep 2 conservative leaning news sites and 2 liberal leaning sites up as 4 separate tabs on my iPad which is my main connection to the internet and news. If a story exists on all 4 sites, it’s news. Assuming you lean one way or the other, everything you’ll else you’ll find (largely hate) will either piss you off or make you happy - which is it’s sole intent. 

I set up Flipboard (an app) with news categories of interest. It gives me news and opinion from both sides. The mistake a lot of people make is confusing news with opinion. Unfortunately, news is now laced with opinion. 

In my house, among the two parents we have 4 co-morbidities, and no, not because of lack of discipline.  So yes, the young people will be fine with covid, we just have to make sure they don't come into the same part of our house with us.  How exactly does that work with young kids?  Who maybe live with grandparents, too?  I think colleges should be open and playing sports.  We could put all the young kids into boarding schools and let them all live together, play sports, do whatever they want.  Or, maybe we should put the 50% of the adult population with co-morbidities in quarantine camps, and let everyone else do what they want.  But as long as all those K-12 kids are living with less-young people with risk factors, then your vision doesn't match with reality.

The reality is that society has already put accommodations into place for those that need accommodations. (For example, if your kids live with grandma, maybe they should have online vs in person school). We have done a phenomenal job innovating ways to identify and help those that are vulnerable. Those that are vulnerable have the right to knowledge and to decide how they want to live. People that are not vulnerable also have a right to live. 

People make decisions about their health daily. What to eat. What supplements to take. Are the medications prescribed worth the risks of the side effects?  Should I have a risky surgery?  How many of our sons have had a surgical procedure that they would not have considered, except to extend their playing career?  They all could have died from the anesthesia, infection or any number of complications. 

@22and25 posted:

So keep your K-12 kids at home and isolated, it's a choice with easy accommodations

That would be funny if it weren't tragic. I'll give you kids eighth grade and up, but for every kid under that age keeping a kid "home and isolated" means the "easy accommodation" of figuring out which parent is going to work from home, if that's possible and if it's not, how are they going to make sure the kids are cared for while home and isolated?

None of this is easy. Please don't pretend it is.

@Iowamom23 posted:

That would be funny if it weren't tragic. I'll give you kids eighth grade and up, but for every kid under that age keeping a kid "home and isolated" means the "easy accommodation" of figuring out which parent is going to work from home, if that's possible and if it's not, how are they going to make sure the kids are cared for while home and isolated?

None of this is easy. Please don't pretend it is.

Serious question:  are you suggesting to keep all kids home because some families have that difficult choice?  

@Iowamom23 posted:

That would be funny if it weren't tragic. I'll give you kids eighth grade and up, but for every kid under that age keeping a kid "home and isolated" means the "easy accommodation" of figuring out which parent is going to work from home, if that's possible and if it's not, how are they going to make sure the kids are cared for while home and isolated?

None of this is easy. Please don't pretend it is.

Not pretending anything.  In the context of the point I was quoting it's really quite simple.  That context was the parents have comorbidites that put them at risk and they don't want the kids bringing Covid home. If parents are staying home to protect the family from Covid due to a household member's comorbidites,  they are home to provide supervision and direction on home based school options.  If the parents are going out to work then they probably appreciate the option of sending their kids to school.  

When we take those options away, particularly when the science doesn't support it, we are making it more complicated than it needs to be.

Last edited by 22and25
@22and25 posted:

Senna, that was a lot of effort to try to be "right".  What you don't realize is that you simply proved the point many here have been making.  Covid has killed about 10,000 otherwise healthy people.  That is tragic no doubt but not worthy of continuing to lock down large segments of society.  The rest, according to the CDC, had on average 2.6 comorbidites.  Since you seem to have an interest in breaking down the CDC data for the rest of us to understand, perhaps you could tell us what those common comorbidites were and what segment of the population is most effected by them in general.  Here is a hint, the death rate by age will give you this answer.  5 to 40 year olds don't have hypertension, advanced cardiovascular disease and type II diabetes, etc in large numbers.  Those that do can take measures to isolate themselves until herd immunity or a vaccine.

Cancelling activities, sports and school for 5 to 40 year olds is not consistent with the data as we understand it today.  If they get Covid they will be fine if they even get sick at all.  

You said that my original post was one interpretation. Perhaps you meant to say that this proves that “C-19 is not as deadly to those without preexisting conditions/under XX age”. I don’t disagree with that statement. Don’t think anyone would. This has been a common “known” for 4 months.

 But as for the original claim (not yours) of “This news is HUGE and should change entirely the way we deal with covid 19”, which is what I was addressing nearly a page ago? Not the case. Nothing has changed. 

Last edited by Senna

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×