Big Ten Football Season Expected To Proceed – Without Michigan, Michigan State

Donate To GopherHole

It won’t proceed until it gets rid of the contact tracing requirement.
 



This won’t help.
 


The B1G leadership should have held out for a unanimous vote the first time. This is where Warren maybe should have had more influence.
 

Block M said:
The B1G leadership should have held out for a unanimous vote the first time. This is where Warren maybe should have had more influence.
Click to expand...
For sure. This is most definitely where we are going these days; if you don't comply and conform you will be beaten into submission. Independent thought will not be permitted or tolerated.
 

Block M said:
The B1G leadership should have held out for a unanimous vote the first time. This is where Warren maybe should have had more influence.
Click to expand...
Not sure if I follow. So it appears that 7-8 didn't want to play, 3 wanted to play. You wanted to play or not play with the unanimous vote? The 3 votes wanting to play were never going to come to the other side.
 

Block M said:
The B1G leadership should have held out for a unanimous vote the first time. This is where Warren maybe should have had more influence.
Click to expand...
Delaney likely would've had a tough time, can't imagine Warren's position walking in as a first time commissioner without years of relationships with the President's and AD's.
 



Noted in another thread that if governors have any role in this, Michigan's is the most conservative regarding covid. Title of the thread does not surprise me in that regard.
 


mkAz said:
This won’t help.
Click to expand...

Why? They've all recovered without issue, which nearly everyone in this age group does.

They also would have contracted it during practice, which the B1G is still allowed to do.
 

Block M said:
The B1G leadership should have held out for a unanimous vote the first time. This is where Warren maybe should have had more influence.
Click to expand...
The rumor is they basically had that. Then the ACC welshed on he deal at the last second.

Should they have waited and made a joint announcement? That is fair game to argue, sure.
 



GopherWeatherGuy said:
Why? They've all recovered without issue, which nearly everyone in this age group does.

They also would have contracted it during practice, which the B1G is still allowed to do.
Click to expand...
Must be why Big Ten teams have similar numbers??
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
Why? They've all recovered without issue, which nearly everyone in this age group does.

They also would have contracted it during practice, which the B1G is still allowed to do.
Click to expand...

I agree. Whenever I hear shocking numbers of COVID cases, like how 70% of people in the slums of Mumbai have antibodies, it doesn't terrify me. Rather, it makes me believe the disease is less likely to become severe and to fear it less.
 

#2Gopher said:
Not sure if I follow. So it appears that 7-8 didn't want to play, 3 wanted to play. You wanted to play or not play with the unanimous vote? The 3 votes wanting to play were never going to come to the other side.
Click to expand...

Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. The fallout from not showing unity is potentially more problematic in the long term than the delay or loss of a football season. The presidents and chancellors know this.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe said:
For sure. This is most definitely where we are going these days; if you don't comply and conform you will be beaten into submission. Independent thought will not be permitted or tolerated.
Click to expand...

Sure, whatever you say. Put your mask back on.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
Why? They've all recovered without issue, which nearly everyone in this age group does.

They also would have contracted it during practice, which the B1G is still allowed to do.
Click to expand...

Big 10 schools should not approach those numbers if they have better protocols.
 


fmlizard said:
I agree. Whenever I hear shocking numbers of COVID cases, like how 70% of people in the slums of Mumbai have antibodies, it doesn't terrify me. Rather, it makes me believe the disease is less likely to become severe and to fear it less.
Click to expand...

It bears repeating (over and over again). Very few people under the age of 60 who are in good health are afraid of getting Covid-19 themselves. What they're afraid of is getting the virus and unknowingly infecting family members or other people they know and they end up dying from it. There are undoubtedly many thousands of Americans who are now living with the knowledge they infected a loved one or friend who died from Covid-19.
 
Last edited:

I’m guessing some people on here either have no parents, grandparents, older relatives or family friends above 60- or don’t like any of them enough to make them less likely to get ill.
 

Oregon Gopher said:
I’m guessing some people on here either have no parents, grandparents, older relatives or family friends above 60- or don’t like any of them enough to make them less likely to get ill.
Click to expand...

My 70 year old parents had it in March (In FL where they winter, when the death rate was still believed to be 3-5%). They aren’t super forthcoming with health information so it was kind of scary, but they said it really was no worse than a bad cold. I think at this point anyone that has not gotten it should be taking vitamin D supplements, since that sounds like it’s the key to interrupting how the virus attacks your body. Wear a mask to reduce chances of spreading it. But beyond that there is not a lot of risk to those below 60 or 65...
 

Block M said:
Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. The fallout from not showing unity is potentially more problematic in the long term than the delay or loss of a football season. The presidents and chancellors know this.
Click to expand...
The ones who did not show unity were the ones who lost in the vote. Like the coach of Nebraska not even knowing his options and speaking out of line on what they were going to do.

The B1G is organized and designed to show unity. If the B1G decides not to play, the schools do not play. It is the disgruntled one that are speaking out of line and not showing unity.

As you can see, the school officials have all been reminded of the situation and are very quiet about what is taking place until a decision is made together by the conference.
 

PoockItInfor6 said:
My 70 year old parents had it in March (In FL where they winter, when the death rate was still believed to be 3-5%). They aren’t super forthcoming with health information so it was kind of scary, but they said it really was no worse than a bad cold. I think at this point anyone that has not gotten it should be taking vitamin D supplements, since that sounds like it’s the key to interrupting how the virus attacks your body. Wear a mask to reduce chances of spreading it. But beyond that there is not a lot of risk to those below 60 or 65...
Click to expand...
Clearly, you're not afraid of being infected with this virus. You believe that if you get infected, you won't die. You'll recover. (granted, we have ample evidence that there's a good chance you won't really "recover", in the sense you think you will. But everyone on your side wants to sweep that part of it under the rug ... so anyway ... )

So I'm curious, where is that line in the sand, for you? What IFR would flip your switch, so that you would be afraid of contracting it? 3% 5% 10% 20% 50%?


SARS1 had an IFR of like 10%. 1 in 10 who got infected, died.

I'd like to think, clearly, that if we were dealing with that, you'd be much, much less flippant. Right? I mean ... it's almost exactly the same virus this time.
 


MplsGopher said:
Clearly, you're not afraid of being infected with this virus. You believe that if you get infected, you won't die. You'll recover. (granted, we have ample evidence that there's a good chance you won't really "recover", in the sense you think you will. But everyone on your side wants to sweep that part of it under the rug ... so anyway ... )

So I'm curious, where is that line in the sand, for you? What IFR would flip your switch, so that you would be afraid of contracting it? 3% 5% 10% 20% 50%?


SARS1 had an IFR of like 10%. 1 in 10 who got infected, died.

I'd like to think, clearly, that if we were dealing with that, you'd be much, much less flippant. Right? I mean ... it's almost exactly the same virus this time.
Click to expand...

You really can’t respond without showing disdain or an insult can you? 😂

The IFR for a mid 30s male without underlying conditions is maybe 0.01%? 0.05%? That’s 2-3 orders of magnitude different than 10%... I’ve stayed on this board in the past that at 3-5% it 100% makes sense to do the level of shut down that we did in March/April. At an overall 0.3-0.5%, with that heavily concentrated in the 85+ age bracket... it still makes sense to do al we can to keep our at risk from getting infected... but for the general population we each need to assess our own risk/reward profile... Same as with every single decision that we make every day.
 

PoockItInfor6 said:
You really can’t respond without showing disdain or an insult can you? 😂

The IFR for a mid 30s male without underlying conditions is maybe 0.01%? 0.05%? That’s 2-3 orders of magnitude different than 10%... I’ve stayed on this board in the past that at 3-5% it 100% makes sense to do the level of shut down that we did in March/April. At an overall 0.3-0.5%, with that heavily concentrated in the 85+ age bracket... it still makes sense to do al we can to keep our at risk from getting infected... but for the general population we each need to assess our own risk/reward profile... Same as with every single decision that we make every day.
Click to expand...

At what accident rate are you willing to fly? At what accident rate are you willing to drive? At what heart attack rate are you willing to exercise?
 

mkAz said:
Click to expand...
What this tells me is that the conference knows if they decide to play, and a few teams are left out (even the ones at the bottom of the pack) that it opens up the "It wasn't a full strength/real B1G conference schedule" argument, which could be enough to negate a chance at a playoff bid.

If everyone plays, then the B1G had a full conference schedule just like everybody else. The interesting thing is, even among actual sports reporters, the hold outs seem to be changing all the time. It's very confusing.
 


The last thing we want is a some in, some out scenario. Because the Gophers would probably be an “out” and our chief rivals would likely be “in” (Iowa and Nebraska for sure, probably Wisconsin)

Would be crushing for the program and our spirits.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom