[OutsiderFan]

If the school had not canceled football and the kid died of Covid-19, this would probably be positioned as a much larger deal. As it is, the fact he was a football player is only relevant because it makes for a sensational headline. IOW, football had nothing to do with his death.

This bolsters both the "we should play" and the "let's be cautious" sides of the college sports argument.  On the one hand, it's "imagine how many other kids might have been sick or died if his school was playing football."  On the other it is "see, he wasn't even playing football and he died, so what is the extra risk in playing?"

I am probably 55-45 against playing, but can see both arguments having merit. One thing that concerns me is the amount of disruption being caused that is leading to postponements and how it impacts preparing for games. As we know, football takes a good deal of preparation and is a very physical sport. Buddy Teevens has received all kinds of acclaim for his no hitting in practice approach at Dartmouth, but everyone saw what happened to Navy after they did not hitting leading up to their game against BYU. That wasn't pretty.

For me, college football is defined by the students in the crowd and the bands playing. If you don't have those, and there are all kinds of other distractions and things going on to interrupt preparation for playing games, it's not really college football. It's some bastardized version of it being played to generate revenue while taking some extra risks with student safety.

To be honest, I'm just not really into college football this year and I don't think it would be different if the Pac-12 was playing.

[OutsiderFan]

If the school had not canceled football and the kid died of Covid-19, this would probably be positioned as a much larger deal. As it is, the fact he was a football player is only relevant because it makes for a sensational headline. IOW, football had nothing to do with his death.

This bolsters both the "we should play" and the "let's be cautious" sides of the college sports argument.  On the one hand, it's "imagine how many other kids might have been sick or died if his school was playing football."  On the other it is "see, he wasn't even playing football and he died, so what is the extra risk in playing?"

I am probably 55-45 against playing, but can see both arguments having merit. One thing that concerns me is the amount of disruption being caused that is leading to postponements and how it impacts preparing for games. As we know, football takes a good deal of preparation and is a very physical sport. Buddy Teevens has received all kinds of acclaim for his no hitting in practice approach at Dartmouth, but everyone saw what happened to Navy after they did not hitting leading up to their game against BYU. That wasn't pretty.

For me, college football is defined by the students in the crowd and the bands playing. If you don't have those, and there are all kinds of other distractions and things going on to interrupt preparation for playing games, it's not really college football. It's some bastardized version of it being played to generate revenue while taking some extra risks with student safety.

To be honest, I'm just not really into college football this year and I don't think it would be different if the Pac-12 was playing.

[Farm93]

College football player Jamain Stephens dies at age 20 of COVID-19 complications.

California University of Pennsylvania had cancelled their football season, and it is unclear how he contracted it, so it did not necessarily come from any team activities. 

I can only imagine what would happen if a Clemson or Alabama football player ended up dying from Covid-19 at this point.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20...lications/

This one does not appear to be football related.   Given the rate of COVID across the USA colleges and universities it is almost inevitable that several students will die in the next few months, and some will be athletes.

Student-athletes do die from time to time every year.  Any death would depend on the circumstances.   Did the player get COVID from a game or travel or was it likely they got COVID from a large frat party?  The "We must play to honor his memory" crew would note that COVID death rate across Alabama/South Carolina are high and the players are safer here on campus.   They might note the player attended a frat party, wedding, or any number of other events that might be the source.  Etc.

However, the stuff happening in the Big12 this week is a bit troubling IMO.

Oklahoma is flat out stating that they will not share COVID test results with the public.   That might be fine if they were just training on campus, but given they are going to travel soon and play other teams from different communities that approach seems to miss the mark.  

And that is the same conference that has announced three openers were postponed/canceled because of COVID challenges.   TCU, Baylor and Oklahoma State have all had their seasons already impacted by COVID and the season hasn't started yet.   Probably no big deal for the OOC games, but would the same cautious standard be applied for the Red River Shootout?

[Farm93]

College football player Jamain Stephens dies at age 20 of COVID-19 complications.

California University of Pennsylvania had cancelled their football season, and it is unclear how he contracted it, so it did not necessarily come from any team activities. 

I can only imagine what would happen if a Clemson or Alabama football player ended up dying from Covid-19 at this point.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20...lications/

This one does not appear to be football related.   Given the rate of COVID across the USA colleges and universities it is almost inevitable that several students will die in the next few months, and some will be athletes.

Student-athletes do die from time to time every year.  Any death would depend on the circumstances.   Did the player get COVID from a game or travel or was it likely they got COVID from a large frat party?  The "We must play to honor his memory" crew would note that COVID death rate across Alabama/South Carolina are high and the players are safer here on campus.   They might note the player attended a frat party, wedding, or any number of other events that might be the source.  Etc.

However, the stuff happening in the Big12 this week is a bit troubling IMO.

Oklahoma is flat out stating that they will not share COVID test results with the public.   That might be fine if they were just training on campus, but given they are going to travel soon and play other teams from different communities that approach seems to miss the mark.  

And that is the same conference that has announced three openers were postponed/canceled because of COVID challenges.   TCU, Baylor and Oklahoma State have all had their seasons already impacted by COVID and the season hasn't started yet.   Probably no big deal for the OOC games, but would the same cautious standard be applied for the Red River Shootout?

[needle]

For me, college football is defined by the students in the crowd and the bands playing.

I watched a fair amount of a game Saturday, Texas State at home against SMU. It was a fun escape, with the camera showing students in the crowd and a physical distanced band in the stands. Just now, I looked up attendance: 7,500 supposedly.

I tuned into Navy v. BYU and was turned off by the eerie emptiness inside the stadium. It was borderline creepy.

[needle]

For me, college football is defined by the students in the crowd and the bands playing.

I watched a fair amount of a game Saturday, Texas State at home against SMU. It was a fun escape, with the camera showing students in the crowd and a physical distanced band in the stands. Just now, I looked up attendance: 7,500 supposedly.

I tuned into Navy v. BYU and was turned off by the eerie emptiness inside the stadium. It was borderline creepy.

[Farm93]

For me, college football is defined by the students in the crowd and the bands playing.

I watched a fair amount of a game Saturday, Texas State at home against SMU. It was a fun escape, with the camera showing students in the crowd and a physical distanced band in the stands. Just now, I looked up attendance: 7,500 supposedly.

I tuned into Navy v. BYU and was turned off by the eerie emptiness inside the stadium. It was borderline creepy.

I saw moments of the SMU v Texas State game and was shocked.   Texas State plays in a town less than an hour away from Austin and San Antonio while SMU is in Dallas.   Texas, the state with ~100 deaths per day for weeks now.   I realize they tried to be socially distanced, but that event should not have had fans.   No way all of the fans, workers and media in that stadium were COVID-free given what is happening with COVID in Texas.

BYU vs Navy had different issues for me.   Though I guess if any group needs to follow the wishes of our Commander in Chief it would be the military academies.  The game didn't appear close, so I didn't watch any of that game.   I am pleased to know that game did not have fans.    I trust the leaders at the Naval Academy know a deadly threat to their future forces when they see one.

[Farm93]

For me, college football is defined by the students in the crowd and the bands playing.

I watched a fair amount of a game Saturday, Texas State at home against SMU. It was a fun escape, with the camera showing students in the crowd and a physical distanced band in the stands. Just now, I looked up attendance: 7,500 supposedly.

I tuned into Navy v. BYU and was turned off by the eerie emptiness inside the stadium. It was borderline creepy.

I saw moments of the SMU v Texas State game and was shocked.   Texas State plays in a town less than an hour away from Austin and San Antonio while SMU is in Dallas.   Texas, the state with ~100 deaths per day for weeks now.   I realize they tried to be socially distanced, but that event should not have had fans.   No way all of the fans, workers and media in that stadium were COVID-free given what is happening with COVID in Texas.

BYU vs Navy had different issues for me.   Though I guess if any group needs to follow the wishes of our Commander in Chief it would be the military academies.  The game didn't appear close, so I didn't watch any of that game.   I am pleased to know that game did not have fans.    I trust the leaders at the Naval Academy know a deadly threat to their future forces when they see one.

[Goose]

I trust the leaders at the Naval Academy know a deadly threat to their future forces when they see one.

I don't think BYU is THAT good. AFAIK, they don't even have any aircraft carriers.

[Goose]

I trust the leaders at the Naval Academy know a deadly threat to their future forces when they see one.

I don't think BYU is THAT good. AFAIK, they don't even have any aircraft carriers.

[M T]

A post I made earlier was too long for the Cardboard so I had to split it into 2 posts, but then the software merged them into a single post.  Now it won't take an edit for it.  Sigh....

Updating the UA & Auburn numbers in that post.  Note that Auburn changed their week this week, so we seem to be missing a couple of days (which at the daily rate of 0.38% of the students per day, would be another 162 cases for the 2 days) and started to include employees as well as students.    6% of the students at Auburn in under 3 weeks, with the rate still growing.    I note that Auburn is apparently auditing their numbers (but if there is an update, it isn't publicly available that I see.)

University of Alabama (students @ Tuscaloosa only)
Reentry cases (tests within 2 weeks of return to school)
             311  (29,938 tested)  1.0% positive
Date range  Cases
1/1 - 8/18   158
8/19 - 8/24  562  (6 days; 0.31% per day)  Classes began Aug 19.
8/25 - 8/27  481  (3 days; 0.54% per day)
8/28 - 9/3   846  (7 days; 0.40% per day)
9/4 - 9/10   294  (7 days; 0.14% per day)
9/11 - 9/17 119 (7 days; 0.06% per day)
For a total of 2302 since classes started.  (2302 is 7.7% of 29,938)

Auburn University (students @ main campus only)
Reentry cases:
              859    (21,315 tested)  4.0% positive
Date range   Cases
Aug 8-14       32  (7 days)
Aug 15-21     202  (7 days; 0.14% per day)    Classes began Aug 17
Aug 22-28     490  (7 days; 0.33% per day)
Auburn shifted their week to align with the start of classes.  But this now includes students and employees at the main campus. (The % are relative to the number of students.)
Aug 17-23     244  (7 days; 0.16% per day)    Classes began Aug 17
Aug 23-30     550  (7 days; 0.37% per day)
Aug 31-Sep 6  577  (7 days; 0.38% per day)  [Post updated 9/9/20]
Sep 7- Sep 13 108  (7 days; 0.072% per day)  [Post updated 9/15/20]
  1479 since classes started.  (1479 is 6.9% of 21.315)
  10% total in about 42 days.

As of 9/14, Auburn reports they are testing 800-1000 per week in sentinel testing.  These will be self-administered tests, apparently antigen tests (12.5% false negative rate, I believe).

Week ending Sept. 13, 2020: 1.8% of 329 tests
Week ending Sept. 6, 2020: 6.4% of 621 tests

So, adjusting for 12.5% false negative rate, a better estimate of the active positive rate would be 2.1% (9/13) and 7.3% (9/6).

[M T]

A post I made earlier was too long for the Cardboard so I had to split it into 2 posts, but then the software merged them into a single post.  Now it won't take an edit for it.  Sigh....

Updating the UA & Auburn numbers in that post.  Note that Auburn changed their week this week, so we seem to be missing a couple of days (which at the daily rate of 0.38% of the students per day, would be another 162 cases for the 2 days) and started to include employees as well as students.    6% of the students at Auburn in under 3 weeks, with the rate still growing.    I note that Auburn is apparently auditing their numbers (but if there is an update, it isn't publicly available that I see.)

University of Alabama (students @ Tuscaloosa only)
Reentry cases (tests within 2 weeks of return to school)
             311  (29,938 tested)  1.0% positive
Date range  Cases
1/1 - 8/18   158
8/19 - 8/24  562  (6 days; 0.31% per day)  Classes began Aug 19.
8/25 - 8/27  481  (3 days; 0.54% per day)
8/28 - 9/3   846  (7 days; 0.40% per day)
9/4 - 9/10   294  (7 days; 0.14% per day)
9/11 - 9/17 119 (7 days; 0.06% per day)
For a total of 2302 since classes started.  (2302 is 7.7% of 29,938)

Auburn University (students @ main campus only)
Reentry cases:
              859    (21,315 tested)  4.0% positive
Date range   Cases
Aug 8-14       32  (7 days)
Aug 15-21     202  (7 days; 0.14% per day)    Classes began Aug 17
Aug 22-28     490  (7 days; 0.33% per day)
Auburn shifted their week to align with the start of classes.  But this now includes students and employees at the main campus. (The % are relative to the number of students.)
Aug 17-23     244  (7 days; 0.16% per day)    Classes began Aug 17
Aug 23-30     550  (7 days; 0.37% per day)
Aug 31-Sep 6  577  (7 days; 0.38% per day)  [Post updated 9/9/20]
Sep 7- Sep 13 108  (7 days; 0.072% per day)  [Post updated 9/15/20]
  1479 since classes started.  (1479 is 6.9% of 21.315)
  10% total in about 42 days.

As of 9/14, Auburn reports they are testing 800-1000 per week in sentinel testing.  These will be self-administered tests, apparently antigen tests (12.5% false negative rate, I believe).

Week ending Sept. 13, 2020: 1.8% of 329 tests
Week ending Sept. 6, 2020: 6.4% of 621 tests

So, adjusting for 12.5% false negative rate, a better estimate of the active positive rate would be 2.1% (9/13) and 7.3% (9/6).

[teejers1]

A post I made earlier was too long for the Cardboard so I had to split it into 2 posts, but then the software merged them into a single post.  Now it won't take an edit for it.  Sigh....

Updating the UA & Auburn numbers in that post.  Note that Auburn changed their week this week, so we seem to be missing a couple of days (which at the daily rate of 0.38% of the students per day, would be another 162 cases for the 2 days).    6% of the students at Auburn in under 3 weeks, with the rate still growing.    I note that Auburn is apparently auditing their numbers (but if their is an update, it isn't publicly available that I see.)

University of Alabama (students @ Tuscaloosa only)
Reentry cases (tests within 2 weeks of return to school)
             311  (29,938 tested)  1.0% positive
Date range  Cases
1/1 - 8/18   158
8/19 - 8/24  562  (6 days; 0.31% per day)  Classes began Aug 19.
8/25 - 8/27  481  (3 days; 0.54% per day)
8/28 - 9/3   846  (7 days; 0.40% per day)
For a total of 1889 since classes started.  (1889 is 6.3% of 29,938)

Auburn University (students @ main campus only)
Reentry cases:
              859    (21,315 tested)  4.0% positive
Date range   Cases
Aug 8-14       32  (7 days)
Aug 15-21     202  (7 days; 0.14% per day)    Classes began Aug 17
Aug 22-28     490  (7 days; 0.33% per day)
Aug 31-Sep 6  577  (7 days; 0.38% per day) Missing Aug 29 & 30???  [Post updated 9/9/20]
  Roughly 692 in 11 days since classes started.      (692 is 3.2% of 21,315)
  Roughly 1269 in 18(20?) days since classes started.  (1269 is 6.0% of 21.315)
  10% total in 32 days.

At that rate they'll have herd immunity in short order . . .

[teejers1]

A post I made earlier was too long for the Cardboard so I had to split it into 2 posts, but then the software merged them into a single post.  Now it won't take an edit for it.  Sigh....

Updating the UA & Auburn numbers in that post.  Note that Auburn changed their week this week, so we seem to be missing a couple of days (which at the daily rate of 0.38% of the students per day, would be another 162 cases for the 2 days).    6% of the students at Auburn in under 3 weeks, with the rate still growing.    I note that Auburn is apparently auditing their numbers (but if their is an update, it isn't publicly available that I see.)

University of Alabama (students @ Tuscaloosa only)
Reentry cases (tests within 2 weeks of return to school)
             311  (29,938 tested)  1.0% positive
Date range  Cases
1/1 - 8/18   158
8/19 - 8/24  562  (6 days; 0.31% per day)  Classes began Aug 19.
8/25 - 8/27  481  (3 days; 0.54% per day)
8/28 - 9/3   846  (7 days; 0.40% per day)
For a total of 1889 since classes started.  (1889 is 6.3% of 29,938)

Auburn University (students @ main campus only)
Reentry cases:
              859    (21,315 tested)  4.0% positive
Date range   Cases
Aug 8-14       32  (7 days)
Aug 15-21     202  (7 days; 0.14% per day)    Classes began Aug 17
Aug 22-28     490  (7 days; 0.33% per day)
Aug 31-Sep 6  577  (7 days; 0.38% per day) Missing Aug 29 & 30???  [Post updated 9/9/20]
  Roughly 692 in 11 days since classes started.      (692 is 3.2% of 21,315)
  Roughly 1269 in 18(20?) days since classes started.  (1269 is 6.0% of 21.315)
  10% total in 32 days.

At that rate they'll have herd immunity in short order . . .

[OutsiderFan]

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...blacksburg

[OutsiderFan]

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...blacksburg

[JustAnotherFan]

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...blacksburg

"The Hokies are now scheduled to play their first game Sept. 26 against NC State; that game was previously postponed from Sept. 12 because of an increase in coronavirus cases in the Wolfpack athletic department."

I can't wait for an ACC championship game between two 4-0 teams.

---

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...blacksburg

"The Hokies are now scheduled to play their first game Sept. 26 against NC State; that game was previously postponed from Sept. 12 because of an increase in coronavirus cases in the Wolfpack athletic department."

I can't wait for an ACC championship game between two 4-0 teams.

But which two teams will be 4-0? Maybe the ones less eager to find positive cases before a big game?

"Pitt will be without about a half-dozen players for Saturday's game against Austin Peay" https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...s-saturday

[JustAnotherFan]

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...blacksburg

"The Hokies are now scheduled to play their first game Sept. 26 against NC State; that game was previously postponed from Sept. 12 because of an increase in coronavirus cases in the Wolfpack athletic department."

I can't wait for an ACC championship game between two 4-0 teams.

---

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...blacksburg

"The Hokies are now scheduled to play their first game Sept. 26 against NC State; that game was previously postponed from Sept. 12 because of an increase in coronavirus cases in the Wolfpack athletic department."

I can't wait for an ACC championship game between two 4-0 teams.

But which two teams will be 4-0? Maybe the ones less eager to find positive cases before a big game?

"Pitt will be without about a half-dozen players for Saturday's game against Austin Peay" https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...s-saturday

[Farm93]

But which two teams will be 4-0? Maybe the ones less eager to find positive cases before a big game?

"Pitt will be without about a half-dozen players for Saturday's game against Austin Peay" https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...s-saturday

I am happy to see professional athletes trying to make their sports work.  
Quite a few of those leagues have had only isolated COVID outbreaks.  
The athletes seem to understand that to get money from their sport and their sponsors they need to do everything possible to keep COVID out.
Amazing how $$$ can drive behaviors.

And yet, I watch these college conferences trying to wring money out of their amateurs and it just feels so wrong.
I understand the ACC, SEC and Big12 are likely chasing TV $$$, but what are those minor conferences with minimal TV revenue doing out there.

The early college football games has revealed to me that any top draft prospects should just opt out and prepare for their draft.

[Farm93]

But which two teams will be 4-0? Maybe the ones less eager to find positive cases before a big game?

"Pitt will be without about a half-dozen players for Saturday's game against Austin Peay" https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...s-saturday

I am happy to see professional athletes trying to make their sports work.  
Quite a few of those leagues have had only isolated COVID outbreaks.  
The athletes seem to understand that to get money from their sport and their sponsors they need to do everything possible to keep COVID out.
Amazing how $$$ can drive behaviors.

And yet, I watch these college conferences trying to wring money out of their amateurs and it just feels so wrong.
I understand the ACC, SEC and Big12 are likely chasing TV $$$, but what are those minor conferences with minimal TV revenue doing out there.

The early college football games has revealed to me that any top draft prospects should just opt out and prepare for their draft.

[teejers1]

But which two teams will be 4-0? Maybe the ones less eager to find positive cases before a big game?

"Pitt will be without about a half-dozen players for Saturday's game against Austin Peay" https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...s-saturday

I am happy to see professional athletes trying to make their sports work.  
Quite a few of those leagues have had only isolated COVID outbreaks.  
The athletes seem to understand that to get money from their sport and their sponsors they need to do everything possible to keep COVID out.
Amazing how $$$ can drive behaviors.

And yet, I watch these college conferences trying to wring money out of their amateurs and it just feels so wrong.
I understand the ACC, SEC and Big12 are likely chasing TV $$$, but what are those minor conferences with minimal TV revenue doing out there.

The early college football games has revealed to me that any top draft prospects should just opt out and prepare for their draft.

1.  Collecting a paycheck for their school; and 

2.  Winning!  (well, Arkansas State and the Ragin' Cajuns, anyway).

[teejers1]

But which two teams will be 4-0? Maybe the ones less eager to find positive cases before a big game?

"Pitt will be without about a half-dozen players for Saturday's game against Austin Peay" https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...s-saturday

I am happy to see professional athletes trying to make their sports work.  
Quite a few of those leagues have had only isolated COVID outbreaks.  
The athletes seem to understand that to get money from their sport and their sponsors they need to do everything possible to keep COVID out.
Amazing how $$$ can drive behaviors.

And yet, I watch these college conferences trying to wring money out of their amateurs and it just feels so wrong.
I understand the ACC, SEC and Big12 are likely chasing TV $$$, but what are those minor conferences with minimal TV revenue doing out there.

The early college football games has revealed to me that any top draft prospects should just opt out and prepare for their draft.

1.  Collecting a paycheck for their school; and 

2.  Winning!  (well, Arkansas State and the Ragin' Cajuns, anyway).

[Farm93]

But which two teams will be 4-0? Maybe the ones less eager to find positive cases before a big game?

"Pitt will be without about a half-dozen players for Saturday's game against Austin Peay" https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...s-saturday

I am happy to see professional athletes trying to make their sports work.  
Quite a few of those leagues have had only isolated COVID outbreaks.  
The athletes seem to understand that to get money from their sport and their sponsors they need to do everything possible to keep COVID out.
Amazing how $$$ can drive behaviors.

And yet, I watch these college conferences trying to wring money out of their amateurs and it just feels so wrong.
I understand the ACC, SEC and Big12 are likely chasing TV $$$, but what are those minor conferences with minimal TV revenue doing out there.

The early college football games has revealed to me that any top draft prospects should just opt out and prepare for their draft.

1.  Collecting a paycheck for their school; and 

2.  Winning!  (well, Arkansas State and the Ragin' Cajuns, anyway).

I am not sure I would visit Iowa State right now, but I am sure most of the kids will get out of town without also "winning" a case of COVID19.

[Farm93]

But which two teams will be 4-0? Maybe the ones less eager to find positive cases before a big game?

"Pitt will be without about a half-dozen players for Saturday's game against Austin Peay" https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...s-saturday

I am happy to see professional athletes trying to make their sports work.  
Quite a few of those leagues have had only isolated COVID outbreaks.  
The athletes seem to understand that to get money from their sport and their sponsors they need to do everything possible to keep COVID out.
Amazing how $$$ can drive behaviors.

And yet, I watch these college conferences trying to wring money out of their amateurs and it just feels so wrong.
I understand the ACC, SEC and Big12 are likely chasing TV $$$, but what are those minor conferences with minimal TV revenue doing out there.

The early college football games has revealed to me that any top draft prospects should just opt out and prepare for their draft.

1.  Collecting a paycheck for their school; and 

2.  Winning!  (well, Arkansas State and the Ragin' Cajuns, anyway).

I am not sure I would visit Iowa State right now, but I am sure most of the kids will get out of town without also "winning" a case of COVID19.

[JustAnotherFan]

I think the one thing that can make the ACC, Big 12, and SEC look not so terrible at the end of all of this would be the BigTen trying to make it a go in late October. Is the chance of a 6-0 Ohio State or Michigan (haha) team making the CFP worth the negative exposure of starting as cases are quickly rising? I think the BigTen is bonkers.

"If the presidents vote to start the fall football season, the earliest time frame for kickoff would be mid-to-late October."

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ace-sunday

[JustAnotherFan]

I think the one thing that can make the ACC, Big 12, and SEC look not so terrible at the end of all of this would be the BigTen trying to make it a go in late October. Is the chance of a 6-0 Ohio State or Michigan (haha) team making the CFP worth the negative exposure of starting as cases are quickly rising? I think the BigTen is bonkers.

"If the presidents vote to start the fall football season, the earliest time frame for kickoff would be mid-to-late October."

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ace-sunday

[chrisk]

I think the one thing that can make the ACC, Big 12, and SEC look not so terrible at the end of all of this would be the BigTen trying to make it a go in late October. Is the chance of a 6-0 Ohio State or Michigan (haha) team making the CFP worth the negative exposure of starting as cases are quickly rising? I think the BigTen is bonkers.

"If the presidents vote to start the fall football season, the earliest time frame for kickoff would be mid-to-late October."

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ace-sunday

But they would be doing it in the context of frequent, fast response testing. And before Thanksgiving, any remaining students will be gone from campus, so most of the season would be played without interaction with the student body.
In the Big 10 and Pac-10 play in parallel, they can play their own bowl games on their own time frame and blow off th CFP. You could have the Rose Bowl the day before and the week after the Super Bowl.

[chrisk]

I think the one thing that can make the ACC, Big 12, and SEC look not so terrible at the end of all of this would be the BigTen trying to make it a go in late October. Is the chance of a 6-0 Ohio State or Michigan (haha) team making the CFP worth the negative exposure of starting as cases are quickly rising? I think the BigTen is bonkers.

"If the presidents vote to start the fall football season, the earliest time frame for kickoff would be mid-to-late October."

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ace-sunday

But they would be doing it in the context of frequent, fast response testing. And before Thanksgiving, any remaining students will be gone from campus, so most of the season would be played without interaction with the student body.
In the Big 10 and Pac-10 play in parallel, they can play their own bowl games on their own time frame and blow off th CFP. You could have the Rose Bowl the day before and the week after the Super Bowl.

[teejers1]

I think the one thing that can make the ACC, Big 12, and SEC look not so terrible at the end of all of this would be the BigTen trying to make it a go in late October. Is the chance of a 6-0 Ohio State or Michigan (haha) team making the CFP worth the negative exposure of starting as cases are quickly rising? I think the BigTen is bonkers.

"If the presidents vote to start the fall football season, the earliest time frame for kickoff would be mid-to-late October."

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ace-sunday

But they would be doing it in the context of frequent, fast response testing.  And before Thanksgiving, any remaining students will be gone from campus, so most of the season would be played without interaction with the student body.
In the Big 10 and Pac-10 play in parallel, they can play their own bowl games on their own time frame and blow off th CFP.  You could have the Rose Bowl the day before and the week after the Super Bowl.

Big Ten might play (they would need to flip the votes of 6-7 presidents from a vote taken a mere month ago); Pac 12 will not.

And I'm trying to figure out of that is a good or bad thing for Stanford.  From a football perspective, I lean bad - only because this is Stanford's best chance to have  winning record in the foreseeable future.  However, if they play and Stanford sucks (again), then what?  Shaw isn't going anywhere, so . . . 

I still have my doubts that the college football season will actually be completed.  Maybe.  But there will certainly be a lot of stumbles, cancellations, forfeits, etc. along the way.

From a non-football standpoint, just skip it.  While I generally thin it's safer for a majority of college football players to live within the college football regimen of Covid awareness than live at home without it - particularly if other students are not on campus - that concern is probably less for Cardinal players than the universe of college players at large.

[teejers1]

I think the one thing that can make the ACC, Big 12, and SEC look not so terrible at the end of all of this would be the BigTen trying to make it a go in late October. Is the chance of a 6-0 Ohio State or Michigan (haha) team making the CFP worth the negative exposure of starting as cases are quickly rising? I think the BigTen is bonkers.

"If the presidents vote to start the fall football season, the earliest time frame for kickoff would be mid-to-late October."

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ace-sunday

But they would be doing it in the context of frequent, fast response testing.  And before Thanksgiving, any remaining students will be gone from campus, so most of the season would be played without interaction with the student body.
In the Big 10 and Pac-10 play in parallel, they can play their own bowl games on their own time frame and blow off th CFP.  You could have the Rose Bowl the day before and the week after the Super Bowl.

Big Ten might play (they would need to flip the votes of 6-7 presidents from a vote taken a mere month ago); Pac 12 will not.

And I'm trying to figure out of that is a good or bad thing for Stanford.  From a football perspective, I lean bad - only because this is Stanford's best chance to have  winning record in the foreseeable future.  However, if they play and Stanford sucks (again), then what?  Shaw isn't going anywhere, so . . . 

I still have my doubts that the college football season will actually be completed.  Maybe.  But there will certainly be a lot of stumbles, cancellations, forfeits, etc. along the way.

From a non-football standpoint, just skip it.  While I generally thin it's safer for a majority of college football players to live within the college football regimen of Covid awareness than live at home without it - particularly if other students are not on campus - that concern is probably less for Cardinal players than the universe of college players at large.

[BostonCard]

Posting this article mostly for Teejers benefit.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/11/us/co...74f24220a2

The TL;DR version is there are lots of COVID-19 cases on campus, but few hospitalizations.  Most of the deaths have happened in staff members; I don’t think the article notes any student deaths in the recent outbreaks.

BC

[BostonCard]

Posting this article mostly for Teejers benefit.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/11/us/co...74f24220a2

The TL;DR version is there are lots of COVID-19 cases on campus, but few hospitalizations.  Most of the deaths have happened in staff members; I don’t think the article notes any student deaths in the recent outbreaks.

BC

[magnus]

Big Ten might play (they would need to flip the votes of 6-7 presidents from a vote taken a mere month ago); Pac 12 will not.

Looks like the Big Ten is giving it a go.  Oct 23/24th will be the first game

https://www.foxnews.com/sports/big-ten-r...oronavirus

[magnus]

Big Ten might play (they would need to flip the votes of 6-7 presidents from a vote taken a mere month ago); Pac 12 will not.

Looks like the Big Ten is giving it a go.  Oct 23/24th will be the first game

https://www.foxnews.com/sports/big-ten-r...oronavirus

[chrisk]

Big Ten might play (they would need to flip the votes of 6-7 presidents from a vote taken a mere month ago); Pac 12 will not.

Looks like the Big Ten is giving it a go.  Oct 23/24th will be the first game

https://www.foxnews.com/sports/big-ten-r...oronavirus

Positives on the rapid response tests will be confirmed with a PCR test.

Will be interesting to see how they restructure the 8-game schedule. Apparently, they will then play a championship game the day before CFP bids go out.

[chrisk]

Big Ten might play (they would need to flip the votes of 6-7 presidents from a vote taken a mere month ago); Pac 12 will not.

Looks like the Big Ten is giving it a go.  Oct 23/24th will be the first game

https://www.foxnews.com/sports/big-ten-r...oronavirus

Positives on the rapid response tests will be confirmed with a PCR test.

Will be interesting to see how they restructure the 8-game schedule. Apparently, they will then play a championship game the day before CFP bids go out.

[2006alum]

Feels like we need a new thread now that the title of this one has been proven demonstrably false. 

Incidentally, the power of jinxes! Dow to 10,000! 5m US Covid deaths! C.al wins the CFP. U$C to US News #1 University!

[2006alum]

Feels like we need a new thread now that the title of this one has been proven demonstrably false. 

Incidentally, the power of jinxes! Dow to 10,000! 5m US Covid deaths! C.al wins the CFP. U$C to US News #1 University!

[Snorlax94]

Feels like we need a new thread now that the title of this one has been proven demonstrably false. 

Incidentally, the power of jinxes! Dow to 10,000! 5m US Covid deaths! C.al wins the CFP. U$C to US News #1 University!

LOL.

Incidentally, since you mention Cal winning the cfp, if college football were able to complete the season all the way through the cfp, and if the Pac-12 were participating (which is hard to imagine even if they had a 5 game fall season), I could see some interesting dark horse longshot candidates.

As far as I know, Vegas isn’t even offering odds for a cfp. But given the random risk of illness, and given the poor quality of denfenses due to thin teams, last minute quarantines and a lack of practice, a longshot 300:1 for UCLA would’ve been an attractive bet. This year will be an attractive year to bet on the spread and/or a dual threat qb.

[Snorlax94]

Feels like we need a new thread now that the title of this one has been proven demonstrably false. 

Incidentally, the power of jinxes! Dow to 10,000! 5m US Covid deaths! C.al wins the CFP. U$C to US News #1 University!

LOL.

Incidentally, since you mention Cal winning the cfp, if college football were able to complete the season all the way through the cfp, and if the Pac-12 were participating (which is hard to imagine even if they had a 5 game fall season), I could see some interesting dark horse longshot candidates.

As far as I know, Vegas isn’t even offering odds for a cfp. But given the random risk of illness, and given the poor quality of denfenses due to thin teams, last minute quarantines and a lack of practice, a longshot 300:1 for UCLA would’ve been an attractive bet. This year will be an attractive year to bet on the spread and/or a dual threat qb.