Recruiting Forum Football Talk II

[Devo182]

I say again... Bring me Justin Fields

Sounds good, but no way NCAA would even look at his waiver until 2026.

 

[Jimmy Football]

I’m still trying to figure out what happened within the last 3-4 days that has sent everyone over the edge with canceling the season. All the conferences rolled out their schedules and revised plans and then BAM!!! we are canceling the season.

Nothing substantive has changed as it relates to COVID that I’m aware of, so It’s got to be something else. Right??

I think the Big10 and Pac12 have been moving in this direction for a while, and have just recently begun to pressure the other conferences to follow suit so they don’t have to suffer the backlash alone.

 

[#JuanVol]

SEC trying to get teams to join them for a season. C’mon and get some of this... slowass big 10 teams.

everyone add two games... bama gets Illinois and northwestern and We get Ohio state and Michigan.

 

[Devo182]

Going to meet with an attorney for a consultation this morning about this insurance claim. Hopefully all goes well and he believes I have a case for compensation of losses. Good vibes appreciated, y’all.

Don't forget all us little guys (and bagmen) when you cash in your $10 million settlement. 5*s ain't cheap

 

[Jimmy Football]

Don't forget all us little guys (and bagmen) when you cash in your $10 million settlement. 5*s ain't cheap

He’ll leave us, just like Scrooge McZiti.

 

[franklinpence]

Godspeed, mods.

 

[engineerVOL]

How do we square things like this?

Did you forget athletes get seriously injured all the time. Some even die. And that’s sad. There are precautions put in place and we keep the system going because it benefits many more.

You square things like this with the risk involved which is EXTREMELY LOW for this demographic. There are medicines to treat, ample hospital space. Squared enough?

 

[GoBigOrange86]

If they’re going to have students on campus anyway I’m not sure what sense it makes to say no football. What difference does it make? Makes me wonder if this is a domino that leads to moving classes back online.

 

[volatil]

everyone add two games... bama gets Illinois and northwestern and We get Ohio state and Michigan.

So true

 

[Devo182]

Because the only way to do this safely would be to bring the players to campus but not the rest of the student body. But you can’t do that if you say they’re amateur “students” first - because then you’re asking them to risk their health and safety for no compensation (so the athletic department can make money) - and the other students wouldn’t be required to do that.

Agreed with earlier part of your post, but I've seen this argument mentioned by reporters as something ADs are worried about, optics wise. But it isn't really the same argument, nor very logical imo.

Argument against students on campus - if 10,000 or 20,000 all come to campus, they will spread it easily and into the community. Thousands and thousands of kids on one campus is a disaster waiting to happen. They aren't getting additional monitoring or testing. The whole RISK is due to the volume and going to class in person. Maybe safer at home.

Argument for players being on campus - 110 football players in the athletic dorms (without the additional 10 or 20k students) in at least an attempted bubble situation. Constant monitoring and testing. The risk is limited with a very small volume and virtual classes. There is no inherent covid risk merely by being on a campus. It was in-person classes with large amounts of people. That is all removed now.

110 vs 20,000 just isn't comparable. And 110 is much, much better than 20,110.

The reverse argument is it is actually BETTER to have players AND students on campus together, going to classes, which makes little sense as an optimal scenario. (That said, in this case - what about all athletes getting waivers to be able to take all classes virtually?).

These "optics" are clearly fogging up what is pragmatic logic.

 

[engineerVOL]

Agreed with earlier part of your post, but I've seen this argument mentioned by reporters as something ADs are worried about, optics wise. But it isn't really the same argument, nor very logical imo.

Argument against students on campus - if 10,000 or 20,000 all come to campus, they will spread it easily and into the community. Thousands and thousands of kids on one campus is a disaster waiting to happen. They aren't getting additional monitoring or testing. Safer at home.

Argument for players being on campus - 110 football players in the athletic dorms (without the additional 10 or 20k students) in at least an attempted bubble situation. Constant monitoring and testing.

110 vs 20,000 just isn't comparable. And 110 is much, much better than 20,110.

The reverse argument is it is actually BETTER to have players AND students on campus together, going to classes, which makes little sense as an optimal scenario.

These "optics" are clearly fogging up what is pragmatic logic.

Good post... but “disaster”... nah. We can’t be afraid to get sick.

 

[csprig9]

So true

be nice if they got the teams that wanted to play and throw out the schedule and play just a bunch of random teams
Maybe each team can pick a couple they want to keep rivalries

 

[Kristy*]

“I want to play… even if we gotta be locked in .. nothing at home for me,” Lorenzo Lingard tweeted on Sunday.

 

[bignewt]

I'm not the one making this political.

two peas in a pod

 

[Bassmaster_Vol]

two peas in a pod

Lets see you bring that neutral, unbiased energy you're always bragging about

 

[Ashevolle]

So who's next to commit, lol?

 

[KPT_VFL]

Would be interesting to see how much worse things could get

My life is fine. Was fine under Trump, Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush and so on and I didn’t agree with all of their policies. If you let politics ruin your life you are doing life wrong.

 

[bignewt]

Lets see you bring that neutral, unbiased energy you're always bragging about

Just did of course you missed it

 

[engineerVOL]

This is going to be a fascinating week.

 

[Bassmaster_Vol]

Just did of course you missed it

 

[drvenner]

In California 52,104 people 17 and under have had the virus.

How many died you say? ONE and that ONE person had underlying health conditions.

In the age group of 18-34 there have been 195,808 cases and 150 deaths. That's a rate of .07. And we know that the vast majority of them had underlying health problems. HEALTHY PEOPLE ARE NOT DYING. IF THEY WERE THERE WOULD BE MORE THAN 150 OUT OF THAT 195,808!!!!!!

It's as simple as that! And how may ATHLETES have DIED???? ZERO.

COVID-19 Cases by Age Group

For whatever reason its hard to find much data that shows the cases in an age group and deaths in an age group. I really wonder why.

Here's Sweden.

29 and younger.

15,749 cases 10 deaths, one of them being 9 or younger and zero being in the 10-19 range.

The data is CLEAR AS DAY.

If you cant see that and continue to believe that there is a reason for anyone young and healthy to fear the virus, then you are a hypochondriac and can't think for yourself or just enjoy the virtue signaling.

That's a sound argument but y you can't ignore that we don't know what unknown long term health effects there might be from the virus.

 

[DeepPurpleFloyd]

Absolutely. The "cure" for the corona virus is to put the "other" side in office and I'd bet that the virus would just miraculously go away. Let me rephrase that. It wouldn't go away but it'd be resolved. It's very obvious who's pushing the virus.

I thought it was supposed to miraculously go away when the weather got warmer.

 

[engineerVOL]

That's a sound argument but y you can't ignore that we don't know what unknown long term health effects there might be from the virus.

But when will we know?

 

[KPT_VFL]

 

[KPT_VFL]

Two pictures sorted by death per million and some how the states being praised for “handling this right” are on top of the entire world. Not just the US. Bias is great when it works in your favor.