Michigan Football families voice support for Coach & #letmplay
August 11th, 2020 at 12:45 PM ^
No, they won't, but that Athletic Department does not want to take on liability.
August 11th, 2020 at 1:00 PM ^
Yet they do accept the liability from all the other hazards from football such as concussions, spinal injuries, etc. School presidents' and athletic directors' biggest fear is they will get cancelled if there is an outbreak bad enough to cause games to be missed or end the season early.
August 11th, 2020 at 12:28 PM ^
Players should be able to play if they judge it the right course for their own situations.
August 11th, 2020 at 12:41 PM ^
Respectfully disagree as the players do not have all the facts and it's not up to these students to decide an acceptable level of risk that is the job of the University.
August 11th, 2020 at 12:59 PM ^
They have enough information to determine their own risk tolerance, but the University isn't going to put itself or its students / student athletes at more risk than they already are. Student athletes seem willing to play, but imagine the backlash from non student athletes parents and their lawyers should sports go on and cases spread. They'll blame athletics even though the spread of the virus is going to happen anyway.
August 11th, 2020 at 12:32 PM ^
I get it. The issue isn't whether the team and coaches have done a good job or not. The issue is what will happen when it's out of their control. Even if the team did a great job quarantining from most of campus and not interacting with the general student population, there's a still a decent chance they can get it from someone in class. Or other teams might do a terrible job, in which case games get cancelled left and right, or worse, it's not caught in time and now Michigan has an outbreak.
If it only depended on things we could control, we'd be having a season. But it doesn't.
August 11th, 2020 at 12:46 PM ^
I think they understand the risks and still have the opinions that they do.
August 11th, 2020 at 12:33 PM ^
I'm not unsympathetic to the players and their families. We merely watch the games for 3 hours every Saturday (4.5 hours if on FOX); they've devoted literally thousands of hours practicing, training, driving to camps, etc etc etc. And I'm confident that the overwhelming majority of the players did all the right things in regards to safety and social distancing during training camp this year, so it really really has to suck that it's likely all for naught.
Sometimes you do everything right but to no avail. I wish that there was a way forwards right now, but this is bigger than just college football. Oh, fucking hell, I would be thrilled if U2 was playing sold-out stadium tours right now and I fucking hate that band (sorry not sorry), because it would mean that we'd attained some semblance of control over the pandemic.
Remember when we were in grade school and the whole class missed out on recess because of a few kids being jackasses? This is that, writ large. We're on pace for 300,000 dead by year's end (i.e. a 100 9/11's) and right now the only meaning check on that number ballooning further is COVID eventually running out of old and/or immuno-compromised people to chew through. I find that scenario abhorrent and so should you. The dirty little secret is that we're all in this together, whether we like it or not. Even if you or me or your neighbor or Cam McGrone is being reasonably conscientious about appropriate safety measures, right now there are enough people who are either passively or actively flouting those measures and perpetuating the spread of the virus because it's just the flu.
It sucks that we will miss out on college football (i.e. the reason we're all on this site) and it is profoundly and gut-wrenchingly unfair that the players and their families have their livelihood and craft ripped away from them. While not nearly on the level of suffering as the hundreds of thousands who will either die or have their bodies permanently scarred, this loss isn't any less real. It is, however, part of the price they and all of us have to pay for letting things get to this point. And right now, there are too many risk factors for the B1G universities to sign off on the big production that a game would be. Obviously I wasn't in the room where it happened, but I am certain this decision was not made lightly - for how could it have been? It is not about, living in fear of our owns shadows, but a sober and stark reckoning of where we are right now.
August 11th, 2020 at 1:12 PM ^
I agree that most of the players did and are doing the right thing. But with something that spreads so easily, esp when you are yelling or breathing heavy, etc. all it takes is one player who did not do the right thing, or 15 Rutgers going to a party, to put all that hard work right in the garbage
August 11th, 2020 at 12:33 PM ^
Is it that surprising that football players and their families want to play football? Non-news to me.
August 11th, 2020 at 12:39 PM ^
I'm pretty sure that most reasonable people, who are presented with the facts from the school's medical professionals and attorneys, would come to the same decision as UM President Schlissel. I definitely get the desire to have a season and would love nothing more but the old saying "it's lonely at the top" is never more true than in cases like this.
August 11th, 2020 at 12:56 PM ^
Why is it all or nothing? It seems the reasonable course of action would be to continue to practice and play games to see how it goes. If it reaches a point at which it does not seem to be working then cancel it at that time.
August 11th, 2020 at 1:00 PM ^
I would guess trying things out to see how it goes doesn't fit into the University's risk management assessment.
August 11th, 2020 at 2:01 PM ^
I guess the counter to that is that if a team has an outbreak (which could absolutely happen; look no further than various CFB teams, MLB, the random HSes that are opening up) then the cat is out of a bag a bit; you can't "un-infect" people. You can obviously mitigate and quarantine, but people are typically awful at internalizing percentages and don't understand that if, say, 10% of your team gets sick then that means 8-9 people have to get sick and they could be one of them.
People have opinions. Players want to play football. That makes sense. Other people don't want them to right now because this disease is still killing a thousand people a day and that's with limited movement, schools closed, etc. Somebody is going to be mad either way. But I get the argument that I'd rather have a bunch of healthy people angry they missed a season than a dozen student athletes on a team recovering from a disease that may have long-term health repercussions. Plus, from a practical sense, you're way less likely to be successfully sued as a school by healthy people than sick ones.
August 11th, 2020 at 1:00 PM ^
If they set up a completely separate entity not under the ncaa or university supervision - go for it. That may be the end of cfb as we know it, Besides maybe keeping the school mascot, going foward, but the sport has been trending towards NFL development league for awhile now.
There is no waiver or Disclaimer that can protect these universities from all liability, specifically with reports around lingering heart, respiratory and circulatory issues. And if you believe every parent/player wishing to play who have a 1st or 2nd round draft grade won’t sue if their kid gets sick and are deemed to have a long term issue that screws their chances in the NFL, you are delusional. They will make claims around “incomplete information”, “player exploitation”, etc.
August 11th, 2020 at 1:20 PM ^
Are they medical professionals? No then I don't care.
If we let people decide we'd still have polio and measles because someone read something on facebook about vaccines. This isn't just about the players and coaches. Its also about testing and turn around times. Is it morally right to utilize millions of tests on college football when its taking 7-10 days for individuals to get test results back?
August 11th, 2020 at 1:26 PM ^
Dr. Chris Hutchinson is a medical professional and supports #letthemplay.
August 11th, 2020 at 1:30 PM ^
It would be interesting to know what the University's medical people are telling the school administrators.
August 11th, 2020 at 1:50 PM ^
We have learned throughout this whole ordeal that medical professionals vary in their opinions and how to go about things.
August 11th, 2020 at 1:57 PM ^
AK47, while I am not faulting them, the medical professionals are all over the map on COVID, including on the issue of whether and to what degree society should re-open. Many support strong lockdowns, closed schools, cancelled sports and basically hiding out and social distancing until this passes or a vaccine is found. Others disagree, noting that despite lockdowns in many states, the virus proliferated regardless and also noting the considerable and permanent negative impacts of such lockdowns, including financial ruin for millions (let's not ignore this), increases in depression, suicide, drug use and abuse, and the general loss of our society.
Which specific medical professions do you want to hear from? Because for every doctor who says "it;s not safe to do ____," there is one who disagrees.
August 11th, 2020 at 2:12 PM ^
Really? Just epidemiologists and virologists. Being an er doctor is a great accomplishment, I don’t think it gives someone special insight into studying how a disease spreads and understanding complex large scale studies on how the different impacts of different policies.
I want dr. Hutchinson there if I get stabbed. I want fauci in a public health crisis.
and of course medical professionals are all over the map, the diseases has existed in humans for approximately 8 months. The constant shifting of understanding is exactly why we should learn towards being more cautious. College football is a luxury item. It should be one of the last things to return, not one of the first.
August 11th, 2020 at 2:48 PM ^
You plainly wrote “medical professional.”
August 11th, 2020 at 2:57 PM ^
And today researchers at Duke published a study that says wearing a gaiter as a mask is worse than wearing nothing. Until now, 'wearing anything over your mouth and nose is better than wearing nothing'. WAIT, What?
As someone else stated, no matter what the findings, there are medical professionals with findings and opinions that are contrary. The bottom line is there are more unknowns than knowns, it would appear... Yet, Michigan's policy and procedures seem to be working pretty well, maybe Notre Dame's as well and the NHL has seemingly gotten it right also.
August 11th, 2020 at 3:38 PM ^
No, no they did not.
They published a study that says wearing a fleece gaiter results in a HIGHER NUMBER of droplets.
Every other mask tested (including bandanas) was better than no mask.
...and they didn't look at dispersion, only number of droplets - so while fleece acts like an atomizer for the respiratory droplets, it's quite likely that even the fleece greatly reduces the blast radius.
August 11th, 2020 at 1:26 PM ^
I understand why they didn’t, but I really wish that Michigan had come out with a proposal for how to make fall sports work. In my mind, it would have had a clear set of criteria based on relevant and easily explainable goals. Something like:
1. Ensure that college sports do not place an undue burden on an overwhelmed medical system - for instance, if health officials determine that elective procedures need to be cancelled, or ER waits exceed x times historical average or ambulances are being diverted from local hospitals more than z times historical average, sports at schools in that area will stop until trigger is no longer exceeded
2.Ensure that college sports do not exacerbate community spread: if local metrics are (low) below X, individual sport metrics must stat below x+y. If local metrics are (high) above Y, individual sport metric must stay below Y-X). If either team has more than z (1?) player test positive in last test before event
3. Ensure that adequate testing is in place. (Needed for metric 2). Athletes must be tested a minimum of x times week. They must be tested no more than y days before each competition and results must be available z hours before event, event will be cancelled.
4.Ensure any player who contracts covid is safe to return: minimum requirements related to negative tests, cardiac testing etc.
5. Ensure that players and schools have understanding of each other’s responsibilities - players expected to meet social distancing/masking requirements, schools expected to cover some amount of long term care related to covid if contracted during season/preseason training period as long as players are meeting their responsibilities.
If a set of criteria like this were laid out and agreed to by all teams in conference, I’d say, let them play.
August 11th, 2020 at 1:37 PM ^
As UMProud says, I would love a Bacon book in a few years detailing what the conversations were like between Pres. Schlissel, med, AD etc.
I hope that the conversations were more like "we are keeping 1st year med students from interacting with patients/each other; we are keeping undergrads out of research internships and career-defining activities (non-revenue sports, maybe things like Model UN etc.)"...so we can't justify making an exception for football despite the real life ramifications for the players, given that re-starting campus is a complete experiment at this point.
On the other hand, would be disappointing if the conversations were more like "we are scared of bad press if players test positive even if contracted outside of football".
Also, there is the factor that universities have to sometimes have policies that aren't "realistic" (e.g., we know many players will be more at risk by violating rules on large parties). Such as, we all know that under age drinking is rampant, but the university should not say "admin will host an under age beer bash because it is safer to have observed under age drinking". (pls don't roast me for poor analogy, i know analogies are horribly inadequate).
August 11th, 2020 at 1:38 PM ^
It’s a really tough call for these administrators. I wish more than anything that they could play the season. But regardless as to whether they start the season now, it seems very unlikely they will be able to finish it. Covid will be exploding throughout September after schools at every level try and reopen and people are forced to spend more time indoors (yes, just my prediction).
Then the choice really isn’t between taking the risks (knowing some guys are going to be hurt by this) and playing the season, but taking the risks to play a part of a season. The risks don’t seem worth it to play 4-5 games.
August 11th, 2020 at 2:09 PM ^
I don't necessarily agree with your prediction that "Covid will be exploding throughout September after schools at every level try and reopen and people are forced to spend more time indoors." While there will certainly be localized spikes, especially in areas with actively increasing spread, it is not universally accepted that opening schools (or anything else for that matter) is going to cause a spike.
I keep using NY as an example in these threads because that's where I live, but NY was also the first and hardest hit. In March and April, COVID was rampantly spreading in NY, largely because of its density. Even outside the city, in suburban Long Island where I live, it seemed is if every person I knew had at least 1 or more family members impacted. While NY shut down aggressively, since about mid-May, and certainly since June, despite the governor's aggressive shut-downs, society has been open. People are dining indoors without masks. While bars are technically not open, I know of at least a dozen in my immediate neighborhood that are operating behind closed doors, with pretty close to full capacity and no distancing. Kids are congregating in enormous groups, playing contact basketball, touch football, swimming in pools with hundreds of others and hanging indoors without masks or any hint at distancing. Likewise, adults are having indoor cocktail parties, dinner parties, etc., again 100% without masks or distancing every weekend. I have personally attended a number, and this weekend was invited to a backyard party with 75+ people (in a tiny yard). Were this not enough, I know of many sports teams practicing indoors without approval. Bottom line, despite the stated lockdown measures still in place, people are already interacting without many restrictions.
Despite all of this, NY numbers continue to decrease. Hospitalizations, positivity, deaths and intubations are at the lowest levels seen since this all started. Many other states that saw spikes over the past month (look at the curve in Az, for example) are seeing similar declines as they come down from the top, many without any of the measures that NY took. Bottom line is that we don't know for sure that September is going to bring a resurgence in places that have already been hit. In fact, worldwide, there is not a single place that was hit hard with COVID that relaxed and then experienced a significant second hit.
Bottom line: we have no idea what is going to happen, but there is reason to believe that we might, in fact, be able to have sports - and other normalcy - in the fall, if people would look more at the science than the headlines that all of the news outlets are running. (And no, I am not saying that COVID is a hoax or should be taken lightly. I think that this is a serious disease that has, in fact killed many people, including by own grandparents. I just think that it may be the case that each locale that got hit hard may have more herd immunity, or T-cell immunity which is the new emerging area for hope, than many initially believed when people were guaranteeing a second wave).
August 11th, 2020 at 3:31 PM ^
It's great that NY has been able to get things turned around for the time being, but they aren't doing anything close to what New Zealand or S. Korea have done and those two places still have stuff popping up.
See here: https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/coronavirus-breaks-zealand-102-…
I'd bet that NY will see a turn for the worse by Oct. There just isn't anywhere in the US that is doing what it would actually take to control this thing. It requires constant coordinated vigilance and we're just not willing to do that.
I hope I'm wrong and you can call me stupid in a few months. That would be a good day!
August 11th, 2020 at 5:26 PM ^
I have to disagree. While I haven't analyzed every state, NY may have really gotten this under control. Considering they are one of the largest states population-wise, their daily new cases and deaths are really low, ~500 (incidence) and 6 (deaths) yesterday. And things have been trending to that for the past 3 months.
With the summer weather and things opening up, any uptick/spike in cases and/or deaths would have been caught by now. I can't see what could happen by October that could change that. I could be wrong, and I hope I'm not.
What we are seeing in most states that are heavily impacted, the disease runs rampant for about 1.5 months, then totally cools off. Illinois is somewhat a counter-example. We were impacted early bad, then it cooled off. We opened up, and daily new cases are going up, but the deaths remain very low (5 yesterday).
August 11th, 2020 at 2:05 PM ^
I would be interested to hear what athletes in other sports feel as well. We focus on football but it sounds like the whole fall season is being cancelled and, frankly, I'd be less against, say, XC or golf having a season than football from a pure safety standpoint.
August 11th, 2020 at 2:09 PM ^
The whole argument of "let the kids play... they've worked too hard to be denied this opportunity" is entirely moot. To quote Clint Eastwood, "deserves got nothing to do with it" (proceeds to shoot Gene Hackman).
However, it still seems to me that where there is a will, there's a way. For the teams that can afford the tests, why can't an entire team be tested on Friday night, be locked in a hotel and kept isolated until game time? If you know that no one on the opposing team or your own sideline is positive, then you should have the assurance to hack, cough, and spit away on each other for the next three hours. If you test positive, you're separated from the team and you go home to quarantine. If you can't keep enough players negative, you forfeit and go home. What am I missing here? I'm not very familiar with the efficacy or turnaround time of the tests - are they not sufficient to pull this off?
August 12th, 2020 at 8:14 AM ^
We should go to their houses to tell them how wrong they are. Come on everyone let's go! We need to let them know how righteous we are ASAP.
For the record...I'm kidding about the above.
For the record regarding the record...Yes, I take the virus seriously...I've been on airplanes this entire time, working in hospitals and wearing a mask since I flew home from seattle on March 12th. That was back when Fauci was still making fun of people wearing masks.