Jamie Pollard letter on falls sports

  • Fanatics -

    Thank you for your patience today and welcome to the newest version of Cyclone Fanatic!

    Most of the changes we have made are very simple, but will greatly improve your user experience while visiting the website.

    We have upgraded our forum software to speed things up. Our homepage is much cleaner and should be even more mobile friendly than before.

    We appreciate your loyalty and are committed to not only keeping Cyclone Fanatic in tip-top shape, but continuing to build this community for the next decade and beyond.

    We ask that if you are experiences any glitches to let us know in this thread . Will will be diligently working on the site all day.

    Thanks again.

    Chris Williams - Publisher

Cyinthenorth

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 29, 2013
4,767
2,114
113
31
Dubuque
Yeah, I want people to die just so I can be “right”. F off buddy, you’re sick in the head.

If people want to live in denial about how bad this can get, then it likely will.

I said I understood the impossible situation JP is in, and I wouldn’t want to be him because he most definitely is deciding between safety and revenue generation.

This virus spreads easily between people. And even if you survive it there can be lasting health impacts like organ failure, etc.
You are being way too dramatic about this. The recovery rate of this virus is astronomical compared to the death/ lasting effects rate etc. I don't think a lot of people who acquire the virus even show symptoms, let alone suffer total organ failure.
 

RealisticCy

Well-Known Member
Nov 2, 2014
859
1,133
93
Ames, IA
I don't disagree with any of this. But I also, as I've stated before, think there are just as many people that think that we can shut everything down and everything will be back to normal on the other end.

To me, the answer lies in the middle. Try to mitigate, do what you can to be safe, but also keep in mind the large scale economic considerations involved in what you do. There's no right/wrong answer to any of that.

And I do genuinely believe there are people who want this to be bad just so they can say "told yah so". Not saying you, or anyone else on here, is one of them. But a quick view of my social media would seem to prove this point. I just don't understand the value in "shut everything down, society as we know it will crumble" line of thinking. Just try to do the best you can to strike an adequate balance and figure out a way to adjust to a new normal.
People need to understand that it isn't decrease infections/deaths OR help the economy.......it is both or neither.

The fastest way to get businesses back up and running, kids back into schools, and sports/any recreational activity back to normal is to wear masks, stay away from people if you can, wash your hands, and self isolate if you are sick. All of those things are the same **** you'd do if you wanted to decrease the spread of the virus. The two goals are tied together, not mutually exclusive.

That's what I don't get about all the "you can't make me wear a mask" people that want to act like nothing is happening.....if we all (100% of Americans) took some pretty minor precautions, without exception, we actually could pretty much act like nothing is happening since our testing capacity has finally expanded. But hell no, a simple piece of cloth over part of your face is too ******* much to ask....
 
  • Like
Reactions: SolarGarlic

Pseudonym

Active Member
Apr 7, 2009
345
27
28
New York, NY
According to whom? Once approved distribution will be a huge issue. The idea that that public at large will be vaccinated spring '21 is probably a fantasy.

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-51665497
https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2020/06/16/fact-sheet-explaining-operation-warp-speed.html The US government has spent billions to be "first in line" with a number of vaccines and are paying the manufacturers to produce them now, so if they are found safe and effective they can begin inoculating people overnight.
 

madguy30

Well-Known Member
Nov 15, 2011
23,821
18,852
113
If you think they are going to get an average donation of 100.00 for athletics from all grads you are certifiably insane.
Not saying all grads. It's theoretical but just average out of that many alum...add in non-alum and you might get something.

On the other side of it, if these donations were asked for, and people didn't that could, it'd be a little odd for them to be concerned about any lost revenue or the things they can't do.

'Why can't I tailgate this fall which costs me $100s each season between gas, food, and alcohol!?'

'Donate toward athletics?! Not MY paycheck.'
 

CascadeClone

Well-Known Member
Oct 24, 2009
3,592
2,360
113
To me, the answer lies in the middle. Try to mitigate, do what you can to be safe, but also keep in mind the large scale economic considerations involved in what you do. There's no right/wrong answer to any of that.
You're one of those people that doesn't care if we all die! j/k

I agree that we need balance. Open up just about everything, and make masks mandatory or face a fine. Like seatbelts. Do they give 100% protection? No. But 65% is a big help. Everyone wears masks, the spread slows down, though it doesn't stop. Eventually we get a vaccine and/or better treatments. But it's a marathon, not a sprint. Masks give really good value in terms of benefit vs cost. You minimize the damage of both the disease and the economy.

Shutting down businesses and the economy has diminishing marginal returns really fast. Unfortunately, concerts and sports stadium crowds are like the #1 thing that should be shut down. Sad face.
 

BryceC

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 23, 2006
19,987
8,129
113
Not saying all grads. It's theoretical but just average out of that many alum...add in non-alum and you might get something.

On the other side of it, if these donations were asked for, and people didn't that could, it'd be a little odd for them to be concerned about any lost revenue or the things they can't do.

'Why can't I tailgate this fall which costs me $100s each season between gas, food, and alcohol!?'

'Donate toward athletics?! Not MY paycheck.'
Last I heard there was about 20,000 donors for the Cyclone Club, anybody feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

Those are the people already in the tailgating lots. They are the people already donating. If they added even 10,000 more donors it would be astronomical, especially in a down economy. Probably at minimum 2/3 of Cyclone alumni could give a crap about sports. Getting an average of 100.00 per person isn't just fantasy stuff, it's absurd.
 

madguy30

Well-Known Member
Nov 15, 2011
23,821
18,852
113
Last I heard there was about 20,000 donors for the Cyclone Club, anybody feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

Those are the people already in the tailgating lots. They are the people already donating. If they added even 10,000 more donors it would be astronomical, especially in a down economy. Probably at minimum 2/3 of Cyclone alumni could give a crap about sports. Getting an average of 100.00 per person isn't just fantasy stuff, it's absurd.
Well in that case, let things fall how they may.
 

CloneGuy8

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 20, 2017
6,922
12,472
113
35
I think this is why we will have a football season. Iowa State will not be the only university hurting badly if there is no football season; the majority of P5 schools will be in the same position.

I think there are ways to do this to make this work. First, I know this won't be popular, but greatly reduce the amount of fans in the stands. I think the 50% capacity figure Pollard threw out earlier is still too much. Limiting the number of fans in the stand will hurt the bottom line, but this is a small piece of the pie when comparing to television contract revene.

Second, I think athletes should have the option whether to play or sit out the season without losing their scholarship. If you're going to rely on these guys to put a product out there, they should have the option to sit out without fear of losing their scholarship.

Third, pay the players that don't sit out. Again, if you're asking for them to play and put themselves at higher risk of catching the virus, I think its only fair to pay them.

This all assumes that daily testing is also performed on every player.
 

BMWallace

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
Sep 11, 2011
516
586
93
Buffalo, NY
Well in that case, let things fall how they may.
Hey man, I appreciate the passion and wanting to help support the team, but you are barking up the wrong tree here. Anyone who is actively posting to CF is already more engaged than 90% of ISU alumni. If they have the ability to be donating, they probably already are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doc

Statefan10

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
May 20, 2019
8,458
5,913
113
25
I think this is why we will have a football season. Iowa State will not be the only university hurting badly if there is no football season; the majority of P5 schools will be in the same position.

I think there are ways to do this to make this work. First, I know this won't be popular, but greatly reduce the amount of fans in the stands. I think the 50% capacity figure Pollard threw out earlier is still too much. Limiting the number of fans in the stand will hurt the bottom line, but this is a small piece of the pie when comparing to television contract revene.

Second, I think athletes should have the option whether to play or sit out the season without losing their scholarship. If you're going to rely on these guys to put a product out there, they should have the option to sit out without fear of losing their scholarship.

Third, pay the players that don't sit out. Again, if you're asking for them to play and put themselves at higher risk of catching the virus, I think its only fair to pay them.

This all assumes that daily testing is also performed on every player.
I think fall football happens in some capacity. Obviously can't say for sure, but think at the least it'll be conference only.

I think the NCAA has to give leeway to the players and allow them an extra year if they don't feel comfortable playing.

I don't think there's any way they pay the players.
 

isufbcurt

Well-Known Member
Apr 21, 2006
17,705
19,623
113
41
Newton
But that is for the University as a whole. How can you separate out the AD? Because I highly doubt these Universities are going to want to use endowments for on-going expenses, especially for athletics. Even if they are technically unrestricted.
You technically can't separate them because they are all part of the same entity and that is how it is reported by the State. Endowments have to go to the items they were earmarked for (See items under "Restrictions").

Endowments fall under the restricted designation. The unrestricted category does not include anything with restrictions - see the footnote explanation I posted in that reply for definitions.
 

yowza

Well-Known Member
Jun 2, 2016
1,039
245
83
We shouldn't be arresting people for not wearing masks. We should be fining them.
Talk to any cop and see how they like that idea. Let's stop all traffic and crime enforcement and just focus on writing mask tickets.
 

diaclone

Well-Known Member
Apr 16, 2006
5,657
4,161
113
I really appreciate JP writing this letter and do not envy the position he is in at all. No great options at all.

I do disagree with this statement he made though.... “Some people have incorrectly framed the issue as safety versus revenue generation.”

That is EXACTLY what the issue is all about.
Yep. He is looking for ways to have fall sports in the midst of rising cases in a pandemic. He'd better off by planning for a fall and spring without sports. It's on the horizon but no one wants to admit it.

I like watching college football, but I LOVE college basketball. I'm preparing to be without both this year. I'll save money, and I'll have more time to read and do other things too. Maybe, I've told myself, those "other things" are more more worthwhile in the long run. We'll see.

JP should be looking from the lens of "creating a new way" - I think he's stuck since he's still framing the debate as safety vs revenue, just be in the middle. This is what happens when there is so much money involved.
 

BMWallace

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
Sep 11, 2011
516
586
93
Buffalo, NY
My rationale for why the season won't happen is pretty simple. Jamie says that the student athletes will be safer and more isolated at ISU. But even in a normal season, they can't stop players from going out and getting in trouble.

If universities want to play the games, and bring in revenue for the school, the athletes have to be completely isolated from the outside world, similar to what we see the pro leagues doing. But then what about the other part of the magic term that makes college sports what they are: STUDENT-athlete. Are the players allowed to attend classes? What happens if a classmate or a professor tests positive? Most of these players live in university housing, how do they avoid other students?

And one more angle that isn't coming up with these discussions: what about the coaching staffs for these teams? ISU has a relatively young staff, but what about someone like Saban, Lovie, or Mack Brown? They are at much higher risk for the adverse effects that come with this virus. Can they be reasonably isolated?

I think all in all, is it will be too hard to maintain isolation while still carrying out a season that involves 150+ players and staff per team.
 

Beyerball

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jun 18, 2013
5,575
3,633
113
Texas
Nebraska has $90 million in a rainy day fund thru their foundation. There are ways to save.
ISU Athletics is 1 of about 15-20 ADs across America who run in the Black every year taking zero tax payer $$..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doc

Cy$

Well-Known Member
Sep 1, 2011
23,524
5,264
113
Ames
I don't disagree with any of this. But I also, as I've stated before, think there are just as many people that think that we can shut everything down and everything will be back to normal on the other end.

To me, the answer lies in the middle. Try to mitigate, do what you can to be safe, but also keep in mind the large scale economic considerations involved in what you do. There's no right/wrong answer to any of that.

And I do genuinely believe there are people who want this to be bad just so they can say "told yah so". Not saying you, or anyone else on here, is one of them. But a quick view of my social media would seem to prove this point. I just don't understand the value in "shut everything down, society as we know it will crumble" line of thinking. Just try to do the best you can to strike an adequate balance and figure out a way to adjust to a new normal.
Seems like the answer then is games with no fans, which will likely be the conclusion when games start
 

Beyerball

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jun 18, 2013
5,575
3,633
113
Texas
If this virus had a higher mortality and morbidity rate for those 22yrs and younger all sports would be cancelled until either Covid is gone, has mutated or an effective vaccine..

but that’s not reality. Reality is Covid mortality rate under 22 yr olds is no diff than FLU..

So all these posts talking about “student safety” is just non sense.. So shut down ISU college?