COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: Emergency (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-11.html)
+--- Forum: Covid-19 (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-12.html)
+--- Thread: COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs (/thread-20728.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: Emergency (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-11.html)
+--- Forum: Covid-19 (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-12.html)
+--- Thread: COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs (/thread-20728.html)
Pages:
1
2
COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs - Farm93 - 10-27-2020
The University of Wisconsin looked so good in week #1 with their 2nd-string QB doing great things.
However the State of Wisconsin is having a tough time with COVID, and it looks like the Badgers QBs may be impacted. Hard to imagine any school wins a lot with the 4th string QB playing 2 or 3 games, and that assumes the 4th string QB doesn't get injured and avoids COVID.
This type of COVID cluster could impact any team this season, but given the rate of positivity in Wisconsin the Badgers were probably a touch more vulnerable than other programs.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/30200062/report-chase-wolf-backup-wisconsin-badgers-qb-graha-mertz-tests-positive-covid-19
RE: COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs - JustAnotherFan - 10-27-2020
(10-27-2020, 05:17 AM)Farm93 Wrote: The University of Wisconsin looked so good in week #1 with their 2nd-string QB doing great things.
However the State of Wisconsin is having a tough time with COVID, and it looks like the Badgers QBs may be impacted. Hard to imagine any school wins a lot with the 4th string QB playing 2 or 3 games, and that assumes the 4th string QB doesn't get injured and avoids COVID.
This type of COVID cluster could impact any team this season, but given the rate of positivity in Wisconsin the Badgers were probably a touch more vulnerable than other programs.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/30200062/report-chase-wolf-backup-wisconsin-badgers-qb-graha-mertz-tests-positive-covid-19
Yeah, that hurts. And 21 days is 38% of their schedule! Fortunately they should have their quarterbacks back before they face juggernaut Indiana on December 5th.
RE: COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs - teejers1 - 10-27-2020
(10-27-2020, 05:17 AM)Farm93 Wrote: The University of Wisconsin looked so good in week #1 with their 2nd-string QB doing great things.
However the State of Wisconsin is having a tough time with COVID, and it looks like the Badgers QBs may be impacted. Hard to imagine any school wins a lot with the 4th string QB playing 2 or 3 games, and that assumes the 4th string QB doesn't get injured and avoids COVID.
This type of COVID cluster could impact any team this season, but given the rate of positivity in Wisconsin the Badgers were probably a touch more vulnerable than other programs.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/30200062/report-chase-wolf-backup-wisconsin-badgers-qb-graha-mertz-tests-positive-covid-19
A colleague's son attends Wisconsin and he has been in Madison since the beginning of summer. Reported that big chunks of kids tested positive (evidently not a lot of concern there for assumed immunity benefits). No notable ill-effects (which is good); but outbreaks on campuses - including football players - is not surprising. At all. Especially there.
P.S. 21 days seems harsh . . . 14 strikes me as sufficient. (But hey, I'm no epidemiologist). Anyone think the Big 10 will revisit that number in coming days?
RE: COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs - BostonCard - 10-27-2020
(10-27-2020, 10:14 AM)teejers1 Wrote:(10-27-2020, 05:17 AM)Farm93 Wrote: The University of Wisconsin looked so good in week #1 with their 2nd-string QB doing great things.
However the State of Wisconsin is having a tough time with COVID, and it looks like the Badgers QBs may be impacted. Hard to imagine any school wins a lot with the 4th string QB playing 2 or 3 games, and that assumes the 4th string QB doesn't get injured and avoids COVID.
This type of COVID cluster could impact any team this season, but given the rate of positivity in Wisconsin the Badgers were probably a touch more vulnerable than other programs.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/30200062/report-chase-wolf-backup-wisconsin-badgers-qb-graha-mertz-tests-positive-covid-19
A colleague's son attends Wisconsin and he has been in Madison since the beginning of summer. Reported that big chunks of kids tested positive (evidently not a lot of concern there for assumed immunity benefits). No notable ill-effects (which is good); but outbreaks on campuses - including football players - is not surprising. At all. Especially there.
P.S. 21 days seems harsh . . . 14 strikes me as sufficient. (But hey, I'm no epidemiologist). Anyone think the Big 10 will revisit that number in coming days?
I think the Big10 selected the 21-day exclusion to protect the student athletes from cardiomyopathy, not contagion to other players. I agree that 14 days (and even 10 days or a series of negative tests) is adequate to protect other players from contagion, but the Big10 and Pac-12 were most concerned about one of the patients developing cardiomyopathy from COVID. Consequently, when they restarted, they put together protocols to restrict athletic participation of any kind for 14 days, and allowed players to slowly start cardiovascular activities in the third week while undergoing a thorough cardiac evaluation.
BC
RE: COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs - chrisk - 10-27-2020
There are reports that the Wisconsin team is close to the threshold which would require cancellation of Saturday's game.
RE: COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs - Farm93 - 10-28-2020
(10-27-2020, 09:08 PM)chrisk Wrote: There are reports that the Wisconsin team is close to the threshold which would require cancellation of Saturday's game.And now that has happened. Game vs Nebraska is cancelled.
Given the rates of positivity in the State of Wisconsin it is so hard to believe this will get better soon for the state, the university or the team.
Sadly, I can imagine this happening to Pac-12 schools too. I guess it is all worth it for some TV revenue.
RE: COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs - fullmetal - 10-28-2020
The players themselves might not be affected severely (some may be), but they do need to prevent transmission to others around them. There are a lot of hospitals around the nation filling up quickly again :(
RE: COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs - Hurlburt88 - 10-28-2020
Wisconsin as a state is in exponential growth, and the Madison campus had a tough start to the year with some dorms being quarantined, but the student numbers overall in the last few weeks have been very good. FAculty numbers are up slightly, but they are saying it is not from student contact (I can't testify to veracity of that claim and have not dug). My hypothesis for the football team is that one exposure ballooned as we know it can, but this is not indicative of overall student numbers at all.
RE: COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs - chrisk - 10-28-2020
Wisconsin pauses football activities for 7 days. It will make it mor difficult to be ready for their next game evev if cleared. Meanwhile, Nebraska gets an extra week to prepare for a Northwestern.
RE: COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs - OutsiderFan - 10-28-2020
I wonder how the residents of Wisconsin feel about the White House releasing a statement declaring victory over the pandemic? Actually, I don't.
New WaPo/ABC poll out this morning shows Biden leading +17 in the state.
Such mixed feelings about the Pac-12 deciding to play games. I'm 100% convinced USC and UCLA are going to suffer similar fates as Wisconsin before too long. Probably Utah as well. I get the drive for revenue and trying to maintain some normalcy, but if the protocol is to shut things down when the virus invades a team, I don't know how it makes sense for the Pac-12 to start at the height of the resurgence. It had the opportunity to be the "adult in the room" and has seemingly pissed it away under what amounts to peer pressure. That said, I'm not sure if not playing would in fact be the best course.
RE: COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs - dabigv13 - 10-28-2020
LA definitely at the start of something. Went from 1 in the ICU a week ago, to 7 now. Back near May/June between the two peaks nadir. Similar picture at other SoCal hospitals. Dodgers win and Halloween this weekend will likely seed more infections especially as prevalence is certainly on rise now. No bueno.
RE: COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs - Farm93 - 10-28-2020
(10-28-2020, 09:17 AM)chrisk Wrote: Wisconsin pauses football activities for 7 days. It will make it mor difficult to be ready for their next game evev if cleared. Meanwhile, Nebraska gets an extra week to prepare for a Northwestern.Nebraska probably needed that game against Wisconsin to essentially reboot their season.
Though I guess if Wisconsin really has schedule or QB availability issues then maybe Nebraska becomes the new BigTen West favorite.
With this news and Penn State's loss to Indiana, it is so hard to imagine the BigTen will get 2 CFP teams.
That's good news for the Pac-12, at least for now.
(10-28-2020, 10:37 AM)dabigv13 Wrote: LA definitely at the start of something. Went from 1 in the ICU a week ago, to 7 now. Back near May/June between the two peaks nadir. Similar picture at other SoCal hospitals. Dodgers win and Halloween this weekend will likely seed more infections especially as prevalence is certainly on rise now. No bueno.I wasn't really following the World Series, but was amazed the Dodgers would just toss away COVID19 CDC guidelines and let a player fresh from a COVID19 positive test return to the field even as dozens of media and player families were mingling with the team. A very bad look.
SoCal at least has favorable weather to help keep infection spread down until late November or even December.
It will not be a good fall/winter, but suspect newsworthy health care infrastructure challenges in the Midwest will scare people in SoCal into compliance before the wave gets too big.
Also - Biden up by 30+ points in CA has meant we have avoided the MAGA superspreader events. I think DC-based GOP members have flown to the OC and San Diego in the last 4 weeks, but generally they were in the state to get money not votes.
RE: COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs - oregontim - 10-28-2020
(10-28-2020, 09:59 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: ... I don't know how it makes sense for the Pac-12 to start at the height of the resurgence. It had the opportunity to be the "adult in the room" and has seemingly pissed it away under what amounts to peer pressure. That said, I'm not sure if not playing would in fact be the best course.Cheers for the honest indecision. In times like these, certainty is not a virtue. Uncertainty is. IMO.
RE: COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs - teejers1 - 10-28-2020
(10-28-2020, 08:31 AM)Farm93 Wrote:(10-27-2020, 09:08 PM)chrisk Wrote: There are reports that the Wisconsin team is close to the threshold which would require cancellation of Saturday's game.And now that has happened. Game vs Nebraska is cancelled.
Given the rates of positivity in the State of Wisconsin it is so hard to believe this will get better soon for the state, the university or the team.
Sadly, I can imagine this happening to Pac-12 schools too. I guess it is all worth it for some TV revenue.
Interestingly (if true), the game was canceled even though Wisconsin was not required to do so by "the numbers" - i.e., they had the players at the position groups sufficient to play the game. If I were Czar of All Things, then I'd mark that game down as a Wisconsin forfeit. Incentives to be smart on "re-opening activities" is a good thing.
RE: COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs - 82lsju - 10-28-2020
(10-28-2020, 04:17 PM)teejers1 Wrote:(10-28-2020, 08:31 AM)Farm93 Wrote:(10-27-2020, 09:08 PM)chrisk Wrote: There are reports that the Wisconsin team is close to the threshold which would require cancellation of Saturday's game.And now that has happened. Game vs Nebraska is cancelled.
Given the rates of positivity in the State of Wisconsin it is so hard to believe this will get better soon for the state, the university or the team.
Sadly, I can imagine this happening to Pac-12 schools too. I guess it is all worth it for some TV revenue.
Interestingly (if true), the game was canceled even though Wisconsin was not required to do so by "the numbers" - i.e., they had the players at the position groups sufficient to play the game. If I were Czar of All Things, then I'd mark that game down as a Wisconsin forfeit. Incentives to be smart on "re-opening activities" is a good thing.
they may be close (or over) on test positivity
Quote:The Big Ten Conference will use data provided by each Chief Infection Officer (CInO) to make decisions about the continuation of practice and competition, as determined by Test Positivity Rate and Population Positivity Rate, based on a seven-day rolling average:
- Test positivity rate (number of positive tests divided by total number of tests administered):
- Green 0-2%
- Orange 2-5%
- Red >5%
- Population positivity rate (number of positive individuals divided by total population at risk):
[*]Decisions to alter or halt practice and competition will be based on the following scenarios:
- Green 0-3.5%
- Orange 3.5-7.5%
- Red >7.5%
[*]
- Green/Green and Green/Orange: Team continues with normal practice and competition.
- Orange/Orange and Orange/Red: Team must proceed with caution and enhance COVID-19 prevention (alter practice and meeting schedule, consider viability of continuing with scheduled competition).
- Red/Red: Team must stop regular practice and competition for a minimum of seven days and reassess metrics until improved.
https://bigten.org/news/2020/9/16/the-big-ten-conference-adopts-stringent-medical-protocols-football-season-to-resume-october-23-24-2020.aspx
RE: COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs - fullmetal - 10-29-2020
(10-28-2020, 04:17 PM)teejers1 Wrote: If I were Czar of All Things, then I'd mark that game down as a Wisconsin forfeit. Incentives to be smart on "re-opening activities" is a good thing.
I'm very much in favor of forfeiture-by-covid as well as this concept in the NFL.
RE: COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs - Farm93 - 10-29-2020
(10-29-2020, 01:53 AM)fullmetal Wrote:It would be if the test results were announced by 3rd parties, but as the testing results are announced by the schools tough policies have flaws.(10-28-2020, 04:17 PM)teejers1 Wrote: If I were Czar of All Things, then I'd mark that game down as a Wisconsin forfeit. Incentives to be smart on "re-opening activities" is a good thing.
I'm very much in favor of forfeiture-by-covid as well as this concept in the NFL.
Just look at the LA Dodgers. If the LA Dodgers were forced to forfeit Game #6 because they started with a COVID positive player do you really think we would have known about the COVID-19 positive test mid-game. (no comment on the post-game craziness, that's for MLB to navigate)
The incentives to hide Thursday and Friday positives in college football would become too much if a forfeit was looming.
If the outbreak is due to known violations of league or conference policies that would be different, but for a lot of these student-athletes they are already suffering the penalty of getting COVID-19. Saddling them with the loss of a potential playoff berth is just too much, too cruel if all they did was get COVID-19 living in their community housing or by visiting their assigned course tutor.
RE: COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs - M T - 10-29-2020
(10-29-2020, 12:44 PM)Farm93 Wrote: If the outbreak is due to known violations of league or conference policies that would be different, but for a lot of these student-athletes they are already suffering the penalty of getting COVID-19. Saddling them with the loss of a potential playoff berth is just too much, too cruel if all they did was get COVID-19 living in their community housing or by visiting their assigned course tutor.
Or by getting it from playing across from or next to a player who he or his team knowingly hid knowledge of having COVID-19, or knowingly avoided or circumvented a test because they were concerned that a positive test would keep them from spreading it to others in the game or practice.
If Joe Average at State U played across from Voldemort Candidate Big Guy and played when he had reason to believe he was infectious with COVID-19, and Big Guy then got sick & missed his big rivalry or playoff game, what would you say? And of course, as we see by the nation's death toll, any of those cases could spread to others who suffer serious health issues.
Sorry, but your idea of cruel is not my idea of cruel.
RE: COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs - teejers1 - 10-29-2020
(10-29-2020, 12:44 PM)Farm93 Wrote:(10-29-2020, 01:53 AM)fullmetal Wrote:It would be if the test results were announced by 3rd parties, but as the testing results are announced by the schools tough policies have flaws.(10-28-2020, 04:17 PM)teejers1 Wrote: If I were Czar of All Things, then I'd mark that game down as a Wisconsin forfeit. Incentives to be smart on "re-opening activities" is a good thing.
I'm very much in favor of forfeiture-by-covid as well as this concept in the NFL.
Just look at the LA Dodgers. If the LA Dodgers were forced to forfeit Game #6 because they started with a COVID positive player do you really think we would have known about the COVID-19 positive test mid-game. (no comment on the post-game craziness, that's for MLB to navigate)
The incentives to hide Thursday and Friday positives in college football would become too much if a forfeit was looming.
If the outbreak is due to known violations of league or conference policies that would be different, but for a lot of these student-athletes they are already suffering the penalty of getting COVID-19. Saddling them with the loss of a potential playoff berth is just too much, too cruel if all they did was get COVID-19 living in their community housing or by visiting their assigned course tutor.
1. The Pac has no "wiggle room" to replay the missed games; thus, having the team that can't play due to Covid forfeit strikes me as entirely reasonable;
2. The B10 had some wiggle room, but I don't think much of it anymore. Thus, same conclusion. [But if teams can reschedule in an open window, then okay].
3. Agree with you on third-party testing being superior. I had hoped that's what is going on - don't schools contract testing out to people who know what they're doing? But if you're right, I agree that pressure would be great to hide results.
P.S. On Turner, I will just say this: we're all influenced by our own situation and experiences. Everyone "gets" that he wanted to be on the field for a once-in-a-career (possibly) accomplishment. And if you're going to ignore MLB directives and say "eff it, this may be my one and only time for such a celebration, so I'm doing it anyway," you have to wear a mask (maybe pull it down briefly for the team snapshot). I mean, what if Roberts contracts it from Turner - there's a real danger there.
Hopefully, all of this will amount to nothing in the real world (I haven't seen any additional repercussions in MSM, which is encouraging). Plus, I suspect this might be one of the few instances where "track and trace" capabilities exist to limit any damage. And Turner most definitely will get suspended for some period next season, and that's entirely appropriate.
RE: COVID19 impacts Wisconsin Badgers' QBs - Farm93 - 10-29-2020
(10-29-2020, 03:34 PM)M T Wrote:Hmmm, not sure your take on my example is correct.(10-29-2020, 12:44 PM)Farm93 Wrote: If the outbreak is due to known violations of league or conference policies that would be different, but for a lot of these student-athletes they are already suffering the penalty of getting COVID-19. Saddling them with the loss of a potential playoff berth is just too much, too cruel if all they did was get COVID-19 living in their community housing or by visiting their assigned course tutor.
Or by getting it from playing across from or next to a player who he or his team knowingly hid knowledge of having COVID-19, or knowingly avoided or circumvented a test because they were concerned that a positive test would keep them from spreading it to others in the game or practice.
If Joe Average at State U played across from Voldemort Candidate Big Guy and played when he had reason to believe he was infectious with COVID-19, and Big Guy then got sick & missed his big rivalry or playoff game, what would you say? And of course, as we see by the nation's death toll, any of those cases could spread to others who suffer serious health issues.
Sorry, but your idea of cruel is not my idea of cruel.
I was not advocating the player should get to play with COVID19. Rather I was advocating that the team should not be forced to forfeit games rather than see cancellation of games.
In Wisconsin's case they are missing a game because of a COVID outbreak. That's the proper thing to do. At this time the game is a cancellation and that is important because that leaves them on track to get into the BigTen CG.
Saddling them with a forfeit for having too many players with COVID creates an odd incentive for Wisconsin to deny the positive test so that they could play Nebraska, presumably without the positive player but WITH all of those that might need to be isolated.
The cruelty then would be for a single positive player to then have close contacts with enough other players for the team to saddled with a forfeit.
Or to give you a different version imagine a school assigned tutor that was asymptomatic and not tested daily, as only players get that benefit, spread the virus to just enough players that the contact rules forced them to miss games. Per current policy that's a cancellation, but if it was a forfeit...
Then that tutor would be blamed for causing tOSU and the BigTen from getting into the CFP.
How about that? Is that cruel enough?
The student-athletes are not in bubbles. They may get COVID because of the NCAA's desire for TV revenue. That would be cruel.
To then potentially saddle that rather innocent victim to force the team to forfeit and miss the CFP would be very cruel.
In my example the player is not actually playing in the game, so the hypothetical you laid out was not part of my observation of cruelty.
My use of the LA Dodgers was to point out how organizations could do questionable things to win if given a chance. If the penalties for a positive test are too severe then teams may try to do things to keep playing. Make the policies too restrictive and the scenario you outlined could happen.
I agree that would be cruel, but the best way to avoid that scenario is to make sure the penalties for getting COVID are not so punitive that players, coaches or schools hide positive results.