Dan Patrick is reporting it is over

“DP was told an hour ago that the Big 10 and Pac 12 will cancel their football seasons tomorrow… The ACC and the Big 12 are on the fence… And the SEC is trying to get teams to join them for a season.”

https://twitter.com/dpshow/status/1292810469779136512?s=21

Or maybe an All-SEC season. So basically like any other year.

7 Likes

Sadly, not much of a surprise. As a plus we could have an all SEC plus BYU year, but BYU only plays road games in the SEC.

2 Likes

The infection rates, linked to ALL the athletes playing in fall sports needing to be tested constantly, forget the cleaning and sanitation, and no fans in the stands…it pencils out to a huge cost with minimal revenue coming in - even for the P5.

Since you can’t just shut down everything but football, you have to shut it all down.

5 Likes

This dan patrick info seems like an intentional attempt to gauge public reaction. Per ESPN, the Big 10 presidents have not voted. Pac-12 will vote tomorrow.

This aint over til its over.

You serious, Clark?

I hope you’re right, but I just don’t see a coordinated effort to gauge public reaction using media outlets like Dan Patrick; I don’t think the PAC-12 and school presidents are that organized right now. I would think it’s more likely that they rushed to a decision and the info leaked out. But, I hope you’re right.

1 Like

Welcome back to the board.

Hmmmm. I seem to see that Clemson isn’t in the SEC. And Ohio State.

2 Likes

Breaking as of about 10min ago, from ESPN. Not surprising.

2 Likes

Well, that’s disappointing.

I’m looking forward to all the interesting non-sports threads we come up with this fall. And winter.

Bummer to not have fall sports, but I’ve got to support it and not at all surprised. Meanwhile everybody needs to keep being diligent in protecting themselves and others from the disease so we can get back to normal as quickly as possible.

8 Likes

Yeah, rough time to run a sports message board eh?

4 Likes

I don’t support it. I think the risk to players is negligible, meaning that I think it is less than the risk of serious physical injury the players repeatedly confront in every game. Football is not a no-risk activity. I would let the players decide, and I would preserve their scholarships regardless of their decision.

1 Like

It was obviously a joke, and more geared at the attention the SEC gets over every other conference.

1 Like

Sorry, these days my humor meter is shot.

1 Like

Wait, what? The risk is negligible? Where are you getting your scientific facts? Vladimir Putin and his Soviet Disinformation Bots?

The CDC just published a peer-reviewed study that showed significant long-term pulmonary and cardiovascular risks to individuals 0-18 years old. And one of those risks is a rare, but serious, condition called myocarditis.

Do you expect these unpaid kids should play for you, even if the risk might be lower than it is for you? Are you that callous?

Sorry, but this is the best decision. And yes, football is not a “no risk activity,” risks can be managed whether it’s wearing helmets or having strict rules. But COVID-19 cannot be manage and doesn’t obey any rules.

Come on dude. It’s not about the sport, it’s about protect young lives…

5 Likes

Yes, I think the increased risk to the athletes is negligible. But I will look for the study you referenced to see if it changes my mind. I doubt it will be any more persuasive on this point than your outrage and hyperbole (but for different reasons).

A couple of points. Your immediate reference to Putin and Soviet disinformation bots is telling, suggesting that your real purpose is to discredit with derision instead of engaging in discussion. (Or maybe that was merely an attempt at humor? Soviet? That’s funny, I guess.)

To your next point, many of these athletes are paid—with scholarships and many other amenities. Maybe they should be paid more. I suppose that would affect the cost-benefit analysis.

But it’s not merely a matter of playing for me, although I confess I love to watch. It’s also about playing for themselves. Some of these players will lose future opportunities. For some, a shot at a stellar year and the NFL might have just gone out the window. For some, the desire to play also goes hand in hand with academic success. I hope the schools and the NCAA give some consideration to this when looking at eligibility and scholarship limits.

I don’t feel it is callous to give the players the option to play or opt out for a year. For me it is merely a risk-analysis and risk-acceptance decision. Life is full of risk, and mortality lurks around every corner. If I thought that a lot of young lives would be lost, I would agree with the decision to cancel the season. In that case, I would agree that playing a game should not take precedence over young lives.

1 Like