ADVERTISEMENT

OT 100% NOT the Official Off-Topic/Politics/Corona Thread

HogPocket9455 said:
I don't think football has to be an all or nothing if the decision is made to keep moving forward. If a stadium holds 100k, drop it to 35k and spread them out. We did that voluntarily last year -- it can work.

Imagine how smart it would have looked now if that stadium renovation had ripped out all the bleachers, reduced capacity, and went luxury instead.
Click to expand...

Here's where I think the problem will be with that - How do you justify protecting your fans by limiting (or eliminating) attendance, yet you don't provide protection for the players?

I've never been one to advocate paying players (I am pro compensation for likeness, etc) or unionizing, but in a case like Covid it makes things much more clear cut. The NBA/NFL/MLB is going to play because the players are going to agree to the risk. They are going to agree to take on the risk because the upside is millions of dollars and they also have control of the situation and how they will be protected.

College athletes have no control and have little to gain in this. The media is going to start saying the exact same thing a lot more as the season gets closer. And if you haven't noticed, CFB players have realized they've got some pull. All it is going to take is a few team leaders from a major program to publicly question whether they should be playing this year. That will open the floodgates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RHS_Cyclone
HTHog said:
has every team had a 12% positive rate? What's the current average?
Click to expand...
They do not. Some have 20% and some have 0%. Its June and there's a loooonngg way to go. Just wait until all the students report and the parties start....
 
HTHog said:
has every team had a 12% positive rate? What's the current average?
Click to expand...
Additionally, I’d be intrigued to see what “positive” means. Does it mean your currently infected, been infected, possible to transmit infection?

If it’s an antibody test, that number is in line with pretty much every test that’s been done on the general public.

However, there’s a massive difference between 50% impacted and 50% currently infected who have the ability transmit.
 
MR_ARKANSAS said:
I'm not and I dont see how that is any of your business at all.
Click to expand...
Mostly due to the virtue signaling you've done against the NCAA, it's coaches/players, it's fans, and capitalism. You have the same profession but in a different setting, a public school system. Will you do the job of a coach if Texas allows it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: HTHog
Mhhoover92 said:
Mostly due to the virtue signaling you've done against the NCAA, it's coaches/players, it's fans, and capitalism. You have the same profession but in a different setting, a public school system. Will you do the job of a coach if Texas allows it?
Click to expand...
Virtue signaling huh? I'll do as I please regardless of what Texas decides.
 
mikedamone said:
They do not. Some have 20% and some have 0%. Its June and there's a loooonngg way to go. Just wait until all the students report and the parties start....
Click to expand...
I still think your 50% is insanely high...but I’ll agree it’s silly to assume transmission would decrease with colleges acting accordingly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikedamone
jdr0269 said:
Additionally, I’d be intrigued to see what “positive” means. Does it mean your currently infected, been infected, possible to transmit infection?

If it’s an antibody test, that number is in line with pretty much every test that’s been done on the general public.

However, there’s a massive difference between 50% impacted and 50% currently infected who have the ability transmit.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure they are positive at the time of the test. I don't think they are doing antibody tests.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HTHog
mikedamone said:
Here's where I think the problem will be with that - How do you justify protecting your fans by limiting (or eliminating) attendance, yet you don't provide protection for the players?

I've never been one to advocate paying players (I am pro compensation for likeness, etc) or unionizing, but in a case like Covid it makes things much more clear cut. The NBA/NFL/MLB is going to play because the players are going to agree to the risk. They are going to agree to take on the risk because the upside is millions of dollars and they also have control of the situation and how they will be protected.

College athletes have no control and have little to gain in this. The media is going to start saying the exact same thing a lot more as the season gets closer. And if you haven't noticed, CFB players have realized they've got some pull. All it is going to take is a few team leaders from a major program to publicly question whether they should be playing this year. That will open the floodgates.
Click to expand...

That's all true. And I have no idea how you fix it. I support whatever decision is made, however, if it brings back NCAA football games.
 
mikedamone said:
They do not. Some have 20% and some have 0%. Its June and there's a loooonngg way to go. Just wait until all the students report and the parties start....
Click to expand...
Oh I'm definitely waiting. Want to see how the showdown plays out. I'm just an interested 3rd party trying to figure out the rules of the contest and how we can track the numbers as it goes along. What is the current number, do we know yet?
 
jdr0269 said:
Additionally, I’d be intrigued to see what “positive” means. Does it mean your currently infected, been infected, possible to transmit infection?

If it’s an antibody test, that number is in line with pretty much every test that’s been done on the general public.

However, there’s a massive difference between 50% impacted and 50% currently infected who have the ability transmit.
Click to expand...
good point. We need to lay down the rules right now before this thing gets going so us fans can follow along. What say you @mikedamone ? What is the definition of "positive" for this challenge?
 
jdr0269 said:
Not sure why you’re getting so bent out of shape. I was just interested.
Click to expand...
Your sudden interest is disingenuous. I'm not bent out of shape. You going to ask everyone else the same questions? I'm far from bent out of shape.
 
MR_ARKANSAS said:
Your sudden interest is disingenuous.
Click to expand...
Haha I was actually genuinely interested...which makes your assumption of my “disingenuous” question that much funnier. I know some people dealing with asking individuals coming back to work and I was intrigued to see what a public school system in Houston has told you.

But cool. Hook em or what not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HTHog
jdr0269 said:
Haha I was actually genuinely interested...which makes your assumption of my “disingenuous” question that much funnier. I’ve known some people issues dealing with asking individuals coming back to work and I was intrigued to see what a public school system in Houston has told you.

But cool. Hook em or what not.
Click to expand...
Apologies if that's true but our history of back and forth makes that hard to believe. Surely you understand that. Schools are starting to make decisions on school itself but UIL has the say so on athletics and if anyone tells you they have a clue at all on that decision they are probably lying.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PorkshankRedemption
MR_ARKANSAS said:
Your sudden interest is disingenuous. I'm not bent out of shape. You going to ask everyone else the same questions? I'm far from bent out of shape.
Click to expand...
Jesus.

I would if they openly said, “if my boss says come back to work, I’m not doing it.”

If this is you not bent out of shape, I’m not sure what you aggravated looks like.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HTHog
jdr0269 said:
I still think your 50% is insanely high...but I’ll agree it’s silly to assume transmission would decrease with colleges acting accordingly.
Click to expand...
I just think back to the church choir practice in Washington. 61 people there. 1 symptomatic and 52 (87%) likely contracted it in that 2.5 practice where all they were doing was singing and breathing at close range.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6919e6.htm
Following a 2.5-hour choir practice attended by 61 persons, including a symptomatic index patient, 32 confirmed and 20 probable secondary COVID-19 cases occurred (attack rate = 53.3% to 86.7%); three patients were hospitalized, and two died. Transmission was likely facilitated by close proximity (within 6 feet) during practice and augmented by the act of singing.

Then, I think back to every night out I had in college, which was usually 4-5 hours of standing in a super crowded indoor bar, close talking, yelling, singing. Followed by a number of them hooking up. And this happens night after night after night for 9 months in every college town in the country. And most of those kids don't know they have it. The ones who do, dismiss it as a common cold or a hangover. 99% of them DGAF.

12% before any of that has happened for the next 9 months......
 
  • Like
Reactions: HendrixHog and Mayday'90
MR_ARKANSAS said:
Apologies if that's true but our history of back and forth makes that hard to believe. Surely you understand that. Schools are starting to make decisions on school itself but UIL has the say so on athletics and if anyone tells you they have a clue at all on that decision they are probably lying.
Click to expand...
Eh, I can see that. But I’m not really a grudge holder. Unless someone shits on me in a thread, I’m not out looking for blood with every comment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mass31, RHS_Cyclone, MR_ARKANSAS and 1 other person
HTHog said:
good point. We need to lay down the rules right now before this thing gets going so us fans can follow along. What say you @mikedamone ? What is the definition of "positive" for this challenge?
Click to expand...
I'm saying that throughout the school year 50%+ of college football players will test positive for Covid. Assuming they have school and play football.

I'm probably at a disadvantage if all schools don't see the need to report the positives. I hope there is a study done at some point.
 
mikedamone said:
I'm saying that throughout the school year 50%+ of college football players will test positive for Covid. Assuming they have school and play football.
Click to expand...
So if there are 100 athletes and 10 test positive when they get on campus, you’re saying 45 more will test positive by the end of year?
 
jdr0269 said:
So if there are 100 athletes and 10 test positive when they get on campus, you’re saying 45 more will test positive by the end of year?
Click to expand...
Yes. Or in that example at least 41 more. School year. And I've said football players.
 
jdr0269 said:
So if there are 100 athletes and 10 test positive when they get on campus, you’re saying 45 more will test positive by the end of year?
Click to expand...
you gonna mess a lot of them (not damone) up with that one...............


sneaky

edit - errr wait, based on his response you messed him up too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jegreenwood
jdr0269 said:
Jesus.

I would if they openly said, “if my boss says come back to work, I’m not doing it.”

If this is you not bent out of shape, I’m not sure what you aggravated looks like.
Click to expand...
And I'm still not sure how me saying my personal decisions not being a major topic of discussion in this thread means I am bent out of shape.
jdr0269 said:
Eh, I can see that. But I’m not really a grudge holder. Unless someone shits on me in a thread, I’m not out looking for blood with every comment.
Click to expand...
I guess. I just don't like being painted as an aloof hypocrite with no real reason to be. I've had disagreements about this very topic with fellow coaches and co-workers but that is neither here nor there. When I was working on my Masters my internship was with Dr. Leoanard Williams while he was working on nano-biomaterials while we tried to inactivate an active strand of the Norovirus. I spent some time in epidemiology and population studies as well and I see potential for an explosion with COVID-19. So does he and many others much smarter than me for that matter but everyone is entitled to their opinion on it. I see potential for catastrophe while others see an opportunity for return to norms. I wasted time trying to convince people that the old norm was gone and get scoffed at all of the time for it. At the end of the day we are all just giving opinions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mass31 and RHS_Cyclone
MR_ARKANSAS said:
And I'm still not sure how me saying my personal decisions not being a major topic of discussion in this thread means I am bent out of shape.

I guess. I just don't like being painted as an aloof hypocrite with no real reason to be. I've had disagreements about this very topic with fellow coaches and co-workers but that is neither here nor there. When I was working on my Masters my internship was with Dr. Leoanard Williams while he was working on nano-biomaterials while we tried to inactivate an active strand of the Norovirus. I spent some time in epidemiology and population studies as well and I see potential for an explosion with COVID-19. So does he and many others much smarter than me for that matter but everyone is entitled to their opinion on it. I see potential for catastrophe while others see an opportunity for return to norms. I wasted time trying to convince people that the old norm was gone and get scoffed at all of the time for it. At the end of the day we are all just giving opinions.
Click to expand...
I don’t think I ever called you an aloof hypocrite?

I think I struggle with “the old norm is gone,” concept because I don’t know what norms you are referring to. There was a thread a while back about silver linings from the disease and one hope I had was that a reduced dependence on China would be a great new “norm,” but I don’t think this virus will change the way the world operates: it’s just not catastrophic enough to demand policy change. People may be more cognizant of it and/or know more about epidemiology now, but from a mortality perspective, the rate won’t be that much beyond the annual flu...we just can’t keep people from getting it.

Neat to hear about your masters program. I did mine in microbiology studying the effects of rnai on c elegans. Spent days of my life watching, editing, and creating videos of worms...haha. It was neat though to identify the rna sequences we could mute, how it manifested phenotypically, and how/if you could translate it to a more advanced specimen. The guy who was doing his doctorate was taking the data we pulled on worms and was going to start doing mammalian studies...always wondered what came of it.

Would love to chat with you and mcdmd one of these days.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MR_ARKANSAS
mikedamone said:
I guess I missed it. Oh well.
Click to expand...
I didn’t see your original comment Ht was commenting on.

But this is what I meant:

  • 100 person team
  • All 100 get tested day one
  • 10 of the 100 show up as positive
  • Of the 90 that remain are you saying you assume 50% of those individuals, or 45 people, will test positive in subsequent tests
  • or, are you just assuming 50/100, regardless of test date, will test positive at some point.
 
jdr0269 said:
I didn’t see your original comment Ht was commenting on.

But this is what I meant:

  • 100 person team
  • All 100 get tested day one
  • 10 of the 100 show up as positive
  • Of the 90 that remain are you saying you assume 50% of those individuals, or 45 people, will test positive in subsequent tests
  • or, are you just assuming 50/100, regardless of test date, will test positive at some point.
Click to expand...
He is actually saying 51/100 regardless of test date, based on his statement that 41 additional positives (which fulfills his assessment that greater than 50% will get covid) would give him the W. In your scenario he would need 55/100.

U Sneaky .....
 
HTHog said:
He is actually saying 51/100 regardless of test date, based on his statement that 41 additional positives (which fulfills his assessment that greater than 50% will get covid) would give him the W. In your scenario he would need 55/100.

U Sneaky .....
Click to expand...
Mainly because I think 15% or so of the population has already been infected. So of a 100 person squad you’d only need 35 more people to say its “infected” half the team...when in actuality, it’s only been transmitted from teammate to teammate on 35 of 85 people. Which I still think would be really high. These guys are going to be watched like hawks and I don’t see how half a team could get infected unless they all went to A&M and team orgies were the Friday evening activity.

This virus only has an Ro between 1 and 2 and you have a symptomatic latency period of a week or so. You’d just have to have an extended period of relaxed testing to get that many infected.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HTHog
jdr0269 said:
I didn’t see your original comment Ht was commenting on.

But this is what I meant:

  • 100 person team
  • All 100 get tested day one
  • 10 of the 100 show up as positive
  • Of the 90 that remain are you saying you assume 50% of those individuals, or 45 people, will test positive in subsequent tests
  • or, are you just assuming 50/100, regardless of test date, will test positive at some point.
Click to expand...
I didn’t change my post. I’m saying 50% of the roster. Some schools are already at 20%.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

DanielFair

What to know about the Miami Hurricanes

Replies
15
Views
826
The Trough
mikedamone
mikedamone
masonchoate

Arkansas entering Auburn game angry

Replies
22
Views
1K
The Trough
SpudM70
SpudM70
RileyMcFerran

Know the Foe: Gaining Ole Miss insight with The Grove's Neal McCready

Replies
2
Views
594
The Trough
razrback5
razrback5
masonchoate

Score Predictions: Arkansas vs. LSU

Replies
21
Views
3K
The Trough
Scottythurmans3
Scottythurmans3
masonchoate

GoatLab Brewery Named Official Craft Brewery of the Arkansas Razorbacks and Arkansas Edge NIL Collective

Replies
18
Views
3K
The Trough
SoundCore
SoundCore
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back