[teejers1]

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.

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.

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.

[teejers1]

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.

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.

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.