AP: How does the Big Ten play football without open campuses?

[BleedGopher]

per the AP:

Less than four months before the scheduled kickoff of the college football season, not one of the 14 schools in the Big Ten Conference can say for sure it will have students back on campus this fall — a crucial step for sports.

Uncertainty about how the coronavirus pandemic will unfold through the summer has kept universities from making a definitive decision about the fall semester, which typically begins in late August. The football season, for now, is due to begin Aug. 29, though Big Ten schools don't begin play until the following week.

Commissioners of the nation’s major college football conferences told Vice President Mike Pence last month that college sports cannot return from the coronavirus shutdown until campuses have reopened. Those decisions will lie with individual college presidents working with state and local health officials,

Big Ten Commissioner Kevin Warren told the Chicago Tribune the conference is at least six weeks away from making any determinations about the fall sports season. Organized team activities are on hold until at least June 1 and the situation will be re-evaluated then. Warren's office didn't respond to a message seeking further comment.

Big Ten schools, like others, have begun planning for reopening campuses, possibly with social distancing guidelines, masks and other precautions left in place. But none can say definitively that it will happen on time this fall.

Officials at Ohio State, Penn State, Illinois and Wisconsin said they expect to make announcements in June or July.

Indiana President Michael A. McRobbie wrote in a email to the university community last week that it “would not be realistic or even responsible to promise a full resumption of in-person activity in the fall” while the potential still exists for a recurrence of the virus.

Or as David Weismantel, who co-chairs the campus reopening task force at Michigan State, put it: “We are on the virus’ timeline.”

Maryland, Rutgers, Michigan, Minnesota and Northwestern are in various stages of planning.

The NCAA's top doctor said he is cautiously optimistic that there will be college sports in the fall as long as leaders take a methodical approach. Dr. Brian Hainline told The AP last week that it would have to involve widespread testing for coronavirus.

Regarding football and other fall sports, one early proposal included playing games in stadiums without fans to at least secure the TV revenue, but the idea has been met with some derision.

“Think about that, if students aren’t on campus that means the institution has made a decision it’s not safe for those students to be here on campus,” Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith said. “Why would it be safe for student-athletes? I keep hearing and it’s like, ‘How does that work? It doesn’t make sense.’”

https://www.startribune.com/how-does-the-big-ten-play-football-without-open-campuses/570245772/

Go Gophers!!

 

[bottlebass]

Open up colleges, just remove students with high risk factors from the dorms/campus and have them do online courses. Protect professors/staff who might be older.

 

[The prez sez]

another option: Cancel all nonconference games and play only conference games beginning the last wknd of September

 

[A_Slab_of_Bacon]

With me alone in section 140....

 

[GoGophersUMN]

I'm guessing most campuses will be partially open, where professors with lower risk are encouraged or required to hold in-person classes but students and some professors have the option of learning/teaching remotely. That way, the students who have low risk and are taking classes that would be hurt the most by moving online would be able to go in person while students and professors with higher risk factors and students with few/no hands on classes/labs could stay home. That would allow student-athletes to be on campus even with many students and professors at home.

 

[Just Gopher It!!]

per the AP:

Less than four months before the scheduled kickoff of the college football season, not one of the 14 schools in the Big Ten Conference can say for sure it will have students back on campus this fall — a crucial step for sports.

Uncertainty about how the coronavirus pandemic will unfold through the summer has kept universities from making a definitive decision about the fall semester, which typically begins in late August. The football season, for now, is due to begin Aug. 29, though Big Ten schools don't begin play until the following week.

Commissioners of the nation’s major college football conferences told Vice President Mike Pence last month that college sports cannot return from the coronavirus shutdown until campuses have reopened. Those decisions will lie with individual college presidents working with state and local health officials,

Big Ten Commissioner Kevin Warren told the Chicago Tribune the conference is at least six weeks away from making any determinations about the fall sports season. Organized team activities are on hold until at least June 1 and the situation will be re-evaluated then. Warren's office didn't respond to a message seeking further comment.

Big Ten schools, like others, have begun planning for reopening campuses, possibly with social distancing guidelines, masks and other precautions left in place. But none can say definitively that it will happen on time this fall.

Officials at Ohio State, Penn State, Illinois and Wisconsin said they expect to make announcements in June or July.

Indiana President Michael A. McRobbie wrote in a email to the university community last week that it “would not be realistic or even responsible to promise a full resumption of in-person activity in the fall” while the potential still exists for a recurrence of the virus.

Or as David Weismantel, who co-chairs the campus reopening task force at Michigan State, put it: “We are on the virus’ timeline.”

Maryland, Rutgers, Michigan, Minnesota and Northwestern are in various stages of planning.

The NCAA's top doctor said he is cautiously optimistic that there will be college sports in the fall as long as leaders take a methodical approach. Dr. Brian Hainline told The AP last week that it would have to involve widespread testing for coronavirus.

Regarding football and other fall sports, one early proposal included playing games in stadiums without fans to at least secure the TV revenue, but the idea has been met with some derision.

“Think about that, if students aren’t on campus that means the institution has made a decision it’s not safe for those students to be here on campus,” Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith said. “Why would it be safe for student-athletes? I keep hearing and it’s like, ‘How does that work? It doesn’t make sense.’”

https://www.startribune.com/how-does-the-big-ten-play-football-without-open-campuses/570245772/

Go Gophers!!

Interesting article published 3 weeks ago on a site called Saturday Down South regarding the process where this germinated -

The gig is up. The NCAA knows it, and there's only one solution

Wednesday was a game-changer, a recognition that there is a clear separation between professional athletes and students.

www.saturdaydownsouth.com

Here is nuts & bolts of the article -

The gig is up, and the NCAA knows it.

That’s why, at long last, leaders from its most powerful conferences said Wednesday that there cannot be athletes on the field without students in the classroom.

It was a moment to remember, an administrative end-around.

The key question is why? Why did Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby reveal the money quote Wednesday?

“Our players are students. If we’re not in college, we’re not having contests,” Bowlsby said, according to CBS Sports. “Our message was, we need to get universities and colleges back open, that we were education-based programs, and we weren’t going to have sports until we had something closer to normal college going on.”

Are the college power brokers concerned about the players’ welfare?

Let’s be human and say, yes, absolutely.

Are they concerned beyond belief that playing games without students on campus would present the most compelling, complete evidence yet that they are a professional sports business acting under the protection and pretense of amateurism?

Let’s be realistic and say, yes, absolutely.

They hammered home that point Wednesday.

“The management committee members explained how college sports is different from pro sports,” Bill Hancock said, according to Yahoo! Sports. “For example, college (sports) can’t resume until students are back in class.”

In all honesty, I wasn’t expecting to hear that, in part because the NCAA easily could have noted that kids are in class, just online, and few would have blinked.

I’ve grown so conditioned to the NCAA’s rigid stance on athletes’ rights that Wednesday’s news took me by surprise. I understand wanting to distance themselves from Gundy’s tone-deaf comments. But it seemed odd that they dove into the pro-vs.-college deep end, when, until Wednesday, much of the debate about college football this fall was framed around a different question: As long as kids were taking classes, could colleges play football in empty stadiums? Over the past few weeks, most of us reluctantly came to the conclusion that football in empty stadiums is far more tolerable than no football at all. Basically, for the same reason eating broccoli is better than going hungry. At least it’s something.

Optimism was building and it seemed real.

Professional sports are pushing ahead, leading the charge. As well they should. The NFL Draft will be held next week. The PGA is planning tournaments as early as June. Major League Baseball is working on scenarios to play a season in Arizona and Florida. The NBA hasn’t given up hope of having a postseason. Every bit of it might be held sans fans. Bygones.

Their athletes, after all, are paid to play. It’s a business, with billion-dollar TV contracts. It’s not quite business as usual, but it’s still big business. They have none of the optical pitfalls college administrators have.

Make no mistake, that issue — pay for play, which has been percolating for decades in the college ranks — is at the forefront of Wednesday’s game-changing declaration.

Power 5 athletes receive a nice stipend, but they want more. This isn’t about whether you agree or disagree about paying the players.

This is much more fundamental.

This goes to the heart of the legal ground the NCAA has stood on as long it has existed. These are students, amateurs. They are not employees. They are not professionals. The ADs reminded us of that Wednesday.

There is no hiding now. The curtain has been removed.

The NCAA said athletes can’t be the only students on campus and still pretend it’s all just fun and games for good ol’ State U.

I firmly believe, had the NCAA reached some sort of amenable pay-for-play model years ago, Wednesday’s conversation would have been a lot different. They, too, would be pushing ahead, just like the professional sports commissioners who participated in a conference call with the President.

But pay-for-play hasn’t happened. Not yet, anyway. And NCAA leaders want to keep it that way.

The NCAA backed itself into the corner Wednesday.

What’s the solution? The same as it’s always been. At long last, quit pretending these athletes aren’t employees, that they don’t generate revenue, fund stadiums and create 7-figure head coaches. Quit pretending they don’t deserve a slice of the pie that they harvested and made.

Want to play football in the fall if the kids aren’t back on campus?

The bill is due.

More and more, it looks like that’s the price the NCAA is going to have to pay.

 

[PMWinSTP]

Open up colleges, just remove students with high risk factors from the dorms/campus and have them do online courses. Protect professors/staff who might be older.

Easier said than done.

 

[MplsGopher]

The Big Ten has the power to tell its members that they aren't allowed to hold organized team activities.

They're not going to allow Iowa to get an unfair advantage on the rest of the league, by starting up practice and workouts on June 1st, if it's not possible for every other team in the league to do the same.


That said, I would be very curious to know what the projected status will be for each of the 14 campuses by June 1st.


For Minnesota, my guess is that the main SAH order will expire on May 18th, while some of the more specific orders might be extended (bars and restaurants, etc.). Or perhaps those will also be allowed to reopen, and they'll be restrictive on making people wear masks and/or limiting capacity.

But regardless, this will signal the U that they can start to "sunrise" the TC campus. And as soon as you allow students back in any form, that opens the door for student-athletes to start using training facilities.

So I think Minnesota can be ready by June 1st, if the rest of the league can be.

 

[GridironGus]

Isn't the biggest part of college is having really close contact with someone you just met at a party?

 

[Oregon Gopher]

Open up colleges, just remove students with high risk factors from the dorms/campus and have them do online courses. Protect professors/staff who might be older.

Would you pay 35-55K per year for online classes. I sure wouldn’t have.

 

[Spoofin]

Would you pay 35-55K per year for online classes. I sure wouldn’t have.

I know a U student now that shares your thought on this. In fact, if not back on campus this Fall they will be taking online courses from somewhere else much cheaper.

 

[A_Slab_of_Bacon]

Would you pay 35-55K per year for online classes. I sure wouldn’t have.

No.

But most students I don't think have much in the way of options to transfer like you do when say you pick a different pizza palace.

Maybe some simply don't enroll anywhere... but I suspect most want to get on with their lives and tough it out hoping things improve.

 

[Spoofin]

No.

But most students I don't think have much in the way of options to transfer like you do when say you pick a different pizza palace.

Maybe some simply don't enroll anywhere... but I suspect most want to get on with their lives and tough it out hoping things improve.

Community College would be a good option for most everyone.

 

[HoustonTXGopher]

The NCAA has already made it clear that football is not happening unless students are back on campus. End of story, so to speak.

 

[fmlizard]

It's looking more and more like the 2021 Spring Game will be against Iowa.

With so much talk of a 2nd wave this fall I can't see super risk-averse governors and school administrators opening up. The Big Ten footprint has shown to have some of the most cautious leaders and policies. If it comes down to students in classes it ain't happening in the fall.

And it's a shame, because the statistics show that the whole student body could get Covid and the severe outcomes could be counted on your fingers.

 

[PitinoFan]

If they don’t play, a lot of programs are going to go under, which means fewer opportunities for kids that really need a way out of bad situations. There are so many unintended consequences, I can’t even begin to wrap my brain around it.

 

[GoldenRodents]

And it's a shame, because the statistics show that the whole student body could get Covid and the severe outcomes could be counted on your fingers.

...and the supreme irony is that young people (45 and under) could propel the whole society to herd immunity if you just let them live normal lives.

 

[Cedar Rapids Gopher]

China has opened movie theaters and restaurants. We should be at the same place near the middle of June

 

[#2Gopher]

China has opened movie theaters and restaurants. We should be at the same place near the middle of June

Korea did too, however they had to shut them down due to the virus picking up badly.

 

[Rouser]

Open up colleges, just remove students with high risk factors from the dorms/campus and have them do online courses. Protect professors/staff who might be older.

Its not as much about the students themselves, as they are lower risk for severe complications, its about cluster and community spread among students which then will cause it to explode in other communities (their homes when they visit, retail/bars, teachers,).

 

[50PoundHead]

Community College would be a good option for most everyone.

I am old and I can remember when community colleges across the board were seen to deliver comparable content to that of the first two academic years at four-year schools. Again, seems is a mushy word, but the connotation attached to community college education these days is that the product is subpar. I agree that a lot of students are going to head that direction and maybe that will help improve the image of community college.

 

[Pete smith]

Wear a mask, go to the games, clap your hands when the Gophers score. Pretty simple when you think about it. But then I am sure some students will shy away because of the virus threat as they lite their cigarette.

 

[short ornery norwegian]

Open up colleges, just remove students with high risk factors from the dorms/campus and have them do online courses. Protect professors/staff who might be older.

I understand your point of view. I just think that approach would be tricky in a college setting where they are subject to all the federal equality and equal-opportunity regulations.

If you tell student "A" that they can come to class but student "B" has to stay at home, some lawyer will be telling student "B" to file a lawsuit claiming they are not receiving an equal education.

bottom line - as we sit here today, I would put the odds of the college football season opening on schedule at 50-50.

 

[bottlebass]

I understand your point of view. I just think that approach would be tricky in a college setting where they are subject to all the federal equality and equal-opportunity regulations.

If you tell student "A" that they can come to class but student "B" has to stay at home, some lawyer will be telling student "B" to file a lawsuit claiming they are not receiving an equal education.

bottom line - as we sit here today, I would put the odds of the college football season opening on schedule at 50-50.

Student B should do it themselves. The U shouldn't decide, it should be a personal choice based on your own risk vs reward. The U should just provide the opportunity to attend online if you feel you are too at risk to attend in person.

 

[Spoofin]

I am old and I can remember when community colleges across the board were seen to deliver comparable content to that of the first two academic years at four-year schools. Again, seems is a mushy word, but the connotation attached to community college education these days is that the product is subpar. I agree that a lot of students are going to head that direction and maybe that will help improve the image of community college.

I would agree that, in general, community college's would be considered subpar. However, I think that most consider the remote learning they are getting from the quality 4-year schools is also subpar - at which point the question comes on how much you are willing to pay for subpar education.

 

[bottlebass]

Would you pay 35-55K per year for online classes. I sure wouldn’t have.

That's a personal choice. If I had a risk factor that increased my risk of dying of covid I'd pay to be able to attend class online until there is a better treatment or vaccine. Everyone else can just attend regular class.

 

[bottlebass]

Its not as much about the students themselves, as they are lower risk for severe complications, its about cluster and community spread among students which then will cause it to explode in other communities (their homes when they visit, retail/bars, teachers,).

We either need a vaccine or herd immunity. Let the college aged kids lead the way to herd immunity. Don't go to SAlly's if you are an old creeper that is higher risk from covid.

 

[SickAndTiredOfLosingToWI]

Bad news from our technocrat overlords: we're not going back to normal

Scroll down that article to see in chart form what these bastards have planned for us. Any reopening is going to be very much partial and temporary. There are going to be new hoaxed "waves" and even a second "event" at some point--this one possibly involving "bioterror."

No university is going to want to be on the liability hook for reopening. People have been so psychologically terrorized that there will be lawsuits if anybody so much as coughs at a game.

Players packed together on buses, rooming together... forget it. Football is over.

Even in the most optimistic case they aren't going to allow even a half-full house at games and that means a major revenue hit that few athletic departments will be able to absorb. All departments across the country are going to get financially crushed. With football gone, the revenue that supports all of the other sports (except in some cases MBB) is gone too, so most likely all college sports are over as we know them for the foreseeable future.

 

[Gopherlife]

China has opened movie theaters and restaurants. We should be at the same place near the middle of June

Hopefully, you got that news from someone other than the Chinese government. ?

 

[forever a gopher]

Bad news from our technocrat overlords: we're not going back to normal

Scroll down that article to see in chart form what these bastards have planned for us. Any reopening is going to be very much partial and temporary. There are going to be new hoaxed "waves" and even a second "event" at some point--this one possibly involving "bioterror."

No university is going to want to be on the liability hook for reopening. People have been so psychologically terrorized that there will be lawsuits if anybody so much as coughs at a game.

Players packed together on buses, rooming together... forget it. Football is over.

Even in the most optimistic case they aren't going to allow even a half-full house at games and that means a major revenue hit that few athletic departments will be able to absorb. All departments across the country are going to get financially crushed. With football gone, the revenue that supports all of the other sports (except in some cases MBB) is gone too, so most likely all college sports are over as we know them for the foreseeable future.

That article was pretty doom 'n gloom, but it was published almost 2 months ago. I'm pretty sure very few things are now as they seemed they would be two months ago. Walz was touting 80k MN deaths two months ago based on their models. We all know now that was not at all accurate. I think anything published two months ago can be mostly disregarded, because we know so much more now than we did then. Likewise, any talk of playing sports, etc. in the fall is a bit silly, as we'll know so much more in two more months when we actually have to make a decision.