Wisconsin game in jeopardy

[/\PP ST/\TE GRAD 09]

Can the NCAA at least allow EA Sports to make a NCAA Football game? I need some sense of sanity!

[ArmantiWaterSafety]

Does anyone know how much money comes in from season tickets? I would hope the majority of people would be willing to consider it a donation if push comes to shove, although I don't think it'll make a dent in the overall financial outlook.

[MACAPP86]

The Ivy League is not the benchmark for Div 1 football. The Ivy doesn’t need athletics to survive. They don’t offer scholarships and they don’t rely on television contracts to fund non revenue sports. So it cost them nothing to cancel.

I get that on the benchmark, but cost is only one factor, albeit an important one, in the decision to have football at all this fall. I'm sure health of fans, players, coaches, etc. is at least another one.

[mike87]

i think (hope) they will play. By the time we get to August the Teams will have easily reached herd immunity based on the reporting of cases. The athletes shouldn't have a problem with this virus. The stands will be interesting. I'd bet the schools will follow the restaurant rule and limit to 50% occupancy. Then, like the restaurants, half the people will crowd the front rows (the bar) and half will distance in the upper sections. But the school will have complied with guidelines and should be somewhat protected legally. At least defendable anyway.

[EastHallApp]

My guess is that IF there is football at all, it will be conference only games either in the fall or the spring. We will be lucky if we get that.

We'll probably get down to that at some point, with severely limited attendance. My worry is then that we'll have continued cancellations, large numbers of players unable to play because they're infected. And ultimately whatever "season" happens really isn't doing anything for anyone besides salvaging a little TV revenue.

[sixtoes9134]

guessing attendance will likely be students and season ticket holders only. no single game tix

[/\PP ST/\TE GRAD 09]

What happens when a player tests positive say a week after a game? Who would be required to quarantine at that point? Would the other school's players need to worry since close contact occured? I think there are so many unanswered questions, and the NCAA is far from prepared to provide answers.

[appdaze]

i think (hope) they will play. By the time we get to August the Teams will have easily reached herd immunity based on the reporting of cases. The athletes shouldn't have a problem with this virus. The stands will be interesting. I'd bet the schools will follow the restaurant rule and limit to 50% occupancy. Then, like the restaurants, half the people will crowd the front rows (the bar) and half will distance in the upper sections. But the school will have complied with guidelines and should be somewhat protected legally. At least defendable anyway.

True herd immunity doesn't happen that fast. With viruses you don't get true immunity either. You may have some short term extra protection, but there is a reason for a yearly flu shot. Once you have a flu virus you may be good for a year or as little as a month. Its not true immunity. SARS falls in that same line of thought.
All these people who are getting sick right now could get the covid virus again next year as the virus will never go away now. Its here to stay. We have shots for the flu and look at how it still has a big impact on humans. We still don't know a lot about this virus.

The current plans in NC are looking at AA/BB/online friday and A-week online friday/B-week online friday. The opposite group would be online when the other is in school.

[appdaze]

What happens when a player tests positive say a week after a game? Who would be required to quarantine at that point? Would the other school's players need to worry since close contact occured? I think there are so many unanswered questions, and the NCAA is far from prepared to provide answers.

You test positive you are down 14 days minimum.
The positive player would have to quarantine.
The group of players they worked with would have to quarantine until a negative test clears them and they have been symptom free for, I believe, 10 days.

So yes, if your star QB tests positive you are screwed for 2 weeks.

[appdaze]

http://www.ncaa.org/sport-science-insti ... s-covid-19

http://www.ncaa.org/sport-science-insti ... iate-sport


These will answer quite a few of the questions I've seen this forum ask.

[AppScott89]

What happens when a player tests positive say a week after a game? Who would be required to quarantine at that point? Would the other school's players need to worry since close contact occured? I think there are so many unanswered questions, and the NCAA is far from prepared to provide answers.

You test positive you are down 14 days minimum.
The positive player would have to quarantine.
The group of players they worked with would have to quarantine until a negative test clears them and they have been symptom free for, I believe, 10 days.

So yes, if your star QB tests positive you are screwed for 2 weeks.

In the work place we are being told that a person can come back to work 10 days after testing positive, if they have been fever free(w/o medication) for 3 days.

Jimmie Johnson tested positive and 4 days later he tested negative. So is this a testing problem or how the virus can work.

[Rekdiver]

i think (hope) they will play. By the time we get to August the Teams will have easily reached herd immunity based on the reporting of cases. The athletes shouldn't have a problem with this virus. The stands will be interesting. I'd bet the schools will follow the restaurant rule and limit to 50% occupancy. Then, like the restaurants, half the people will crowd the front rows (the bar) and half will distance in the upper sections. But the school will have complied with guidelines and should be somewhat protected legally. At least defendable anyway.

Mike...there is no herd immunity....Some people have been showing up with infections again two months after they have been cleared.

[appdaze]

What happens when a player tests positive say a week after a game? Who would be required to quarantine at that point? Would the other school's players need to worry since close contact occured? I think there are so many unanswered questions, and the NCAA is far from prepared to provide answers.

You test positive you are down 14 days minimum.
The positive player would have to quarantine.
The group of players they worked with would have to quarantine until a negative test clears them and they have been symptom free for, I believe, 10 days.

So yes, if your star QB tests positive you are screwed for 2 weeks.

In the work place we are being told that a person can come back to work 10 days after testing positive, if they have been fever free(w/o medication) for 3 days.

Jimmie Johnson tested positive and 4 days later he tested negative. So is this a testing problem or how the virus can work.

A lot of that depends on when they catch it. JJ was probably on the back swing of it already. NASCAR will have their own policies but the collegiate sports will follow tougher restrictions as a lot of the institutions are state run and will have those tougher guidelines.

[mike87]

i think (hope) they will play. By the time we get to August the Teams will have easily reached herd immunity based on the reporting of cases. The athletes shouldn't have a problem with this virus. The stands will be interesting. I'd bet the schools will follow the restaurant rule and limit to 50% occupancy. Then, like the restaurants, half the people will crowd the front rows (the bar) and half will distance in the upper sections. But the school will have complied with guidelines and should be somewhat protected legally. At least defendable anyway.

Mike...there is no herd immunity....Some people have been showing up with infections again two months after they have been cleared.

you might be right. I can't keep up with the changing stories on this virus, and I think the virus has mutated as well. Every other virus it seems that you get at least several months immunity once you have caught it.

[Thor58]

What happens when a player tests positive say a week after a game? Who would be required to quarantine at that point? Would the other school's players need to worry since close contact occured? I think there are so many unanswered questions, and the NCAA is far from prepared to provide answers.

You test positive you are down 14 days minimum.
The positive player would have to quarantine.
The group of players they worked with would have to quarantine until a negative test clears them and they have been symptom free for, I believe, 10 days.

So yes, if your star QB tests positive you are screwed for 2 weeks.

In the work place we are being told that a person can come back to work 10 days after testing positive, if they have been fever free(w/o medication) for 3 days.

Jimmie Johnson tested positive and 4 days later he tested negative. So is this a testing problem or how the virus can work.

Testing problem??? You decide.

https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/cobb-c ... ours-apart

[Neer86]

[/quote]

It would be pretty easy to argue that the athletes should be given an extra year of eligibility. Then the question becomes does the scholarship limit temporarily go up to allow for recruiting to not be affected (as much for schools as for the rising HS seniors). The transfer portal could be insane if all this happens-so many athletes will have an extra year and already have a degree.
[/quote]

The NCAA has already given spring athletes another year of eligibility. I can't think they'd do it for the spring athletes and not the fall.

[BeauFoster]

Testing problem??? You decide.

https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/cobb-c ... ours-apart

The same thing happened to a PGA Tour golfer 2 weeks ago. One of the biggest problems with this whole thing is that even the “experts” seem to have no damn clue what is going on, and their story changes day to day/week to week, and it’s leading John Q Public (like me) to have no confidence in them whatsoever.

[EastHallApp]

There are such things as false positives and false negatives, to varying levels depending on the test (as I understand it). That's no breaking news. People are trying to develop and mass-produce these tests as quickly as possible, and while a result like that is understandably frustrating for the individual, for society as a whole a semi-reliable test is better than no testing at all because it helps limit the spread.

As far as the science, being an expert doesn't mean you know everything about a subject as soon as it happens. This has emerged fast and, again, even public health experts are learning on the fly and giving the best advice they can based on what they know. It may not be perfect, but again, it's better than everyone just winging it.

I also think the idea that expert advice is all over the place is overblown and driven by intentional efforts to muddy the waters from certain sources who don't like what public health experts advise. For example, there was some early thought that masks were not beneficial, but then additional evidence made it clear they were, and that guidance has been consistent (and repeated) for months now. But if you're someone who wants to make masks a culture war issue, you keep pressing the narrative that no one knows what's happening and everyone is contradicting themselves.

Basically, the best guidance of all public health experts continues to be: Wear masks, socially distance, test and trace everywhere. But a lot of people don't like that advice, so they're attacking its credibility and trying to confuse people.

[asu66]

Testing problem??? You decide.

https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/cobb-c ... ours-apart

The same thing happened to a PGA Tour golfer 2 weeks ago. One of the biggest problems with this whole thing is that even the “experts” seem to have no damn clue what is going on, and their story changes day to day/week to week, and it’s leading John Q Public (like me) to have no confidence in them whatsoever.

To your point, the esteemed Dr. Tony Fauci has reversed himself from one week 'til the next to one day 'til the next on quite a few of his pronouncements or predictions going back three or four months. I'd feel sorry for him if he wasn't so brash with his proclamations and so dismissive of his complete misses. I realize he's trying to stay scientific with an unpredictable force of nature--but so many times he seems to be making calls with his well-worn Ouija board. I've stopped watching/listening to him. Johns-Hopkins U. researchers have become my go-to Covid-19 source.

[Stonewall]

Yes Chuck , the good doctor has , I mean no he hasn't , well yeah he has , and he will , or he won't....