Brett McMurphy article on possibilities for 2020 football season

isufbcurt

Well-Known Member
Apr 21, 2006
21,549
28,603
113
43
Newton
It’s hard to fathom this still needs to be explained!

isufbcurt is just like those selfish church goers that keep going to church. It’s not about the other idiots you see at the needles event, it’s the person at the supermarket or nurse you put at risk.

I do think risk tolerance will have to increase due to our government’s failures. Testing and medical infrastructure will help, but we’ll likely need to accept we cannot get the curve low enough. The fortune will continue to shelter, the lucky survive infection as they carry out muted social-economic activity (not gathering at football games).

If things don’t improve dramatically, no way lawyers allow colleges to hold these events. Perhaps they can find enough players and coaches to have streaming only games, but we’ll see

selfish? I am fine with the social distancing measures in place right now and am fine with them for up to a few months. However, it's not a long term solution (5+ months down the road).

As far as the legal perspective, once the federal and state guidelines are pulled back then there isn't legal standing to sue for getting sick at an event. I hate to use influenza as an example but if someone catches influenza at an ISU event they won't successfully sue ISU because there is no guideline saying the large event shouldn't be held.
 
  • Like
Reactions: norcalcy and Doc

every_yard

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Aug 25, 2006
1,374
1,133
113
I get that everyone wants to have an answer right away, but I’ll be very disappointed if a firm decision is made regarding football season any time before the end of May. A lot will change by then.
 

dualthreat

Well-Known Member
Oct 8, 2008
11,013
3,876
113
There's not going to be a switch thrown where 100% of everything comes back at once.

I would bank on the world looking pretty much normal this fall in terms of day-to-day life, with large crowds still being restricted.

By Fall of 2021, there should be a vaccine, and that should reopen mass gatherings.

Why would there be school if there can't be football? What's the difference between thousands of people in a building and tens of thousands in a stadium? It's not like one is statistically any safer than the other, the recommendation right now is no crowds larger than 10
 

CyJack13

Well-Known Member
May 21, 2010
11,881
1,359
113
You really believe that? You think they are going to just ban large restaurants, campgrounds, any type of fair or festival, soccer all over the world? It's not going to happen, the reality is the power players won't allow it.

They’ve already allowed it. If I had told you a month ago that the NBA season was going to be cancelled, NCAA tournament cancelled, entire states placed on lock down would you ever have believed it? Not a chance. It takes a much better leap to get here then it does to just keep extending things. I don’t expect any large gatherings to be allowed until 2021. There’s just no reasonable path to playing football in a few months without risking millions of lives.
 

isufbcurt

Well-Known Member
Apr 21, 2006
21,549
28,603
113
43
Newton
They’ve already allowed it. If I had told you a month ago that the NBA season was going to be cancelled, NCAA tournament cancelled, entire states placed on lock down would you ever have believed it? Not a chance. It takes a much better leap to get here then it does to just keep extending things. I don’t expect any large gatherings to be allowed until 2021. There’s just no reasonable path to playing football in a few months without risking millions of lives.

That's short term. Long term all those things will be back in action.
 

Cycsk

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Aug 17, 2009
24,139
10,510
113
Some good stuff in here.

The College Football Playoff semifinals and title game held in May – or even June.

A nine-game regular season.

Universities allowing student-athletes – but not the entire student body – back on campus to participate in games played in empty stadiums.

This very well could be the immediate future of college football, according to 112 Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) athletic directors contacted by Stadium.



I found this to be the most interesting clip in the piece:

"If this happens and no fans can attend games, ADs should move matchups to be played every day of the week. The TV ratings would be insane. Instead of 90 percent of the games being played on Saturday, spread out the games and have quadruple-headers every day of the week. It would be one way to recoup the television revenue, and perhaps the media rights holders could compensate the schools an additional amount for moving game dates around."

It would give me a whole new reason to stay home from work!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cycho1

BryceC

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 23, 2006
23,636
13,724
113
So what number do we need to hit for deaths or cases for people to get that there’s not going to be football this fall?

IMO, a million deaths at least.

I don’t think there will be fans in stands, but I think there will be some form of football this year. Maybe not right away in December.
 

CyJack13

Well-Known Member
May 21, 2010
11,881
1,359
113
IMO, a million deaths at least.

I don’t think there will be fans in stands, but I think there will be some form of football this year. Maybe not right away in December.

If it’s too risky to have fans in the stands than how can you risk having players on the field?
 

Gunnerclone

Well-Known Member
Jul 16, 2010
58,115
53,641
113
DSM
If it’s too risky to have fans in the stands than how can you risk having players on the field?

And on the sidelines, and in the box, and you still need assistant coaches, doctors, trainers, managers, refs, and tv crews. Its just not going to happen.
 

JM4CY

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Aug 23, 2012
23,624
42,483
113
America
And on the sidelines, and in the box, and you still need assistant coaches, doctors, trainers, managers, refs, and tv crews. Its just not going to happen.
Uhm... you forgot cheerleaders...

1e0291b40c1045cf9ca42d9012f1d70e.gif
 

rochclone

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jan 28, 2009
4,507
4,348
113
And on the sidelines, and in the box, and you still need assistant coaches, doctors, trainers, managers, refs, and tv crews. Its just not going to happen.

With this administration and Faucci’s decision to mass produce vaccines after Phase I trials (late April completion) I would be shocked if there wasn’t a push for a vaccine by mid/late October as Phrase III trials come to a close. Just in time for that election in November. Football season will be played in some form or another because if it doesn’t happen then college sports and the programs we all love are destroyed. Too much money on the line and people’s tolerance for risk will be very different in September then it is 30 days into this thing.
 

jmb

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 12, 2006
18,106
7,682
113
This is exactly where I see myself getting to. We're flattening the curve with actions now. Mortality rates will become much clearer very soon. The disease is going to spread over the population eventually. Everybody can make their own choice, but I'm not staying in a hole for 18 months.
Good thing folks serve so you can exercise your right to stupid, selfish, and arrogant.
 

jmb

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 12, 2006
18,106
7,682
113
You really believe that? You think they are going to just ban large restaurants, campgrounds, any type of fair or festival, soccer all over the world? It's not going to happen, the reality is the power players won't allow it.
Power players? Or selfish pukes? One in the same here.
 

jmb

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 12, 2006
18,106
7,682
113
I get your point but it's starting to get difficult to listen to people talk about things being shut down for multiple months. Close family member got laid off today because of this thing. Her job was in what a lot of people would consider a 'non-essential' industry. Her company was absolutely devastated because people can't gather. But it was still her job and her economic support. A lot us that are social distancing and working from home are doing OK (and still getting paid for now). But, when we talk about things being "frivolous" or "non-essential" like sports, restaurants or other industies, there are people who make their living off the infrastructure that supports that stuff. Curt is making a cost benefit argument. That argument is coming to the broader economy whether we like it or not and that includes "frivolous" pursuits like college and pro sports.
There were people that made their living making horse shoes. What is your point? **** changes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CycloneErik

nickoff

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Oct 14, 2017
403
396
63
45
Portland, OR
I think, that if 100,000 - 200,000+ Americans die from this, like models say, all bets of anything happening are off. There will be nothing involving more than a few people until a vaccine is avail. The morality and decency of this country won't allow it. Trump craziness be damned.
 

WhoISthis

Well-Known Member
Oct 6, 2010
5,087
3,101
113
If it’s too risky to have fans in the stands than how can you risk having players on the field?
The same way social distancing allows for some to continue go to work now, but eliminates large scale gatherings.

It’s about spread risk. That risk is much easier to manage testing and controlling a couple hundred people already micromanaged and under control than 60k of the public.

Imo a bigger question is whether provisions are made for there to be NCAA sports if schools are all online.
 

DarkStar

Well-Known Member
Sep 15, 2009
6,007
6,531
113
Omaha
Some good stuff in here.

The College Football Playoff semifinals and title game held in May – or even June.

A nine-game regular season.

Universities allowing student-athletes – but not the entire student body – back on campus to participate in games played in empty stadiums.

This very well could be the immediate future of college football, according to 112 Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) athletic directors contacted by Stadium.
If it is not safe for the fans to be at the game, why would it be safe for the players to be at the game?

Why should we expect these student athletes to risk their future careers by getting an illness that will likely leave them with 30% reduced lung capacity.

No football until a vaccine is developed is the only reasonable plan of action.
 

CyJack13

Well-Known Member
May 21, 2010
11,881
1,359
113
The same way social distancing allows for some to continue go to work now, but eliminates large scale gatherings.

It’s about spread risk. That risk is much easier to manage testing and controlling a couple hundred people already micromanaged and under control than 60k of the public.

Imo a bigger question is whether provisions are made for there to be NCAA sports if schools are all online.

College football isn’t an essential job. That’s what you’re missing, there’s no need for 18-22 year old to play a game during this. If schools are all online there is zero percent chance they’re playing any sports next year, which is the most likely outcome at this time.
 

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron