I Think We Can All Agree

[KentuckyBoiler]

I think our group can agree that Commissioner Warren has done an incredible lousy job (trying to keep it clean here) as his first year as Commissioner. We still don't have any idea, if there is going to be a Spring season. Who knows when that will be announced. Since it looks like the ACC, Big 12, and SEC are going to have Fall football. I think this is going to set the Big Ten back in football in Fall 2021, whether we have football in the Spring or not. The financial impact on athletic budgets, teams, scholarships, and athletic department jobs are not known yet and will take months to play out.

I thought this part of the article summed up my opinion of him too.

Finebaum said. "He could easily teach a course at a university, 'How not to spend your first year as a college commissioner.' We all watched these things over the years. I've never seen one go as poorly as his.

Here is the full article:

https://247sports.com/college/purdu...e-of-what-went-wrong-Paul-Finebaum-150622261/

 

[BoilerinLouisville]

While we speculate, Louisville announced today the plan to allow 30% capacity or 18k fans for home games.
Mind boggling each conference is so far part on this issue, also very frustrating.

 

[purduepat1969]

While we speculate, Louisville announced today the plan to allow 30% capacity or 18k fans for home games.
Mind boggling each conference is so far part on this issue, also very frustrating.

UofL has already proven multiple times that they don't care about anything other than UofL. Why would you be surprised by this?

 

[Purdue80]

Moving this from a different thread since it is germane and the other thread may be winding down...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

While a number of these threads speak to the fact that teams from other conferences have already begun using the "you can play football in our conference and we'll get you to the league sooner" angle when recruiting or trying to flip high school players, a potentially overlooked element is the fact that many/most B1G/Pac-10 coaches will be taking salary reductions as schools attempt to close the cost/revenue gap.

If I am a good coach -- HC or assistant -- I want to 1) play football, and 2) earn what I am worth. I expect that it is only a matter of time before we see some big name coaches move from the B1G and Pac-10 conferences to schools in the three other Power 5 conferences. ADs at those schools will play the same "we play football" and you won't be asked for salary reductions if you come to our school and conference card.

The B1G's decision to not play fall football will have a very long tail. If conferences that are choosing to play football are successful in doing so, the B1G will have damaged its reputation and competitiveness for a decade or more. If conferences that are playing fall football experience significant illnesses -- or, heaven forbid, deaths of players or coaches -- or end up cancelling their seasons after just a few games, then the B1G's and Pac-10's decision to postpone/cancel the 2020 season will be a good recruiting angle for those schools.

I personally would have liked to see the B1G at least start the season and adjust as needed week-to-week. High schools are playing, other conferences are playing, most schools in the B1G are conducting in-person classes. Playing football in an environment that can be somewhat more controlled than what is possible in high schools and classrooms has a better chance of success. Give me a "can do" attitude every day v. a "can't do" attitude.

I believe that it was Abraham Lincoln who said "Whether you believe that you can or that you can't, you are right." I agree!

What do others think?

Boiler Up!

 

[TMFT]

Moving this from a different thread since it is germane and the other thread may be winding down...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

While a number of these threads speak to the fact that teams from other conferences have already begun using the "you can play football in our conference and we'll get you to the league sooner" angle when recruiting or trying to flip high school players, a potentially overlooked element is the fact that many/most B1G/Pac-10 coaches will be taking salary reductions as schools attempt to close the cost/revenue gap.

If I am a good coach -- HC or assistant -- I want to 1) play football, and 2) earn what I am worth. I expect that it is only a matter of time before we see some big name coaches move from the B1G and Pac-10 conferences to schools in the three other Power 5 conferences. ADs at those schools will play the same "we play football" and you won't be asked for salary reductions if you come to our school and conference card.

The B1G's decision to not play fall football will have a very long tail. If conferences that are choosing to play football are successful in doing so, the B1G will have damaged its reputation and competitiveness for a decade or more. If conferences that are playing fall football experience significant illnesses -- or, heaven forbid, deaths of players or coaches -- or end up cancelling their seasons after just a few games, then the B1G's and Pac-10's decision to postpone/cancel the 2020 season will be a good recruiting angle for those schools.

I personally would have liked to see the B1G at least start the season and adjust as needed week-to-week. High schools are playing, other conferences are playing, most schools in the B1G are conducting in-person classes. Playing football in an environment that can be somewhat more controlled than what is possible in high schools and classrooms has a better chance of success. Give me a "can do" attitude every day v. a "can't do" attitude.

I believe that it was Abraham Lincoln who said "Whether you believe that you can or that you can't, you are right." I agree!

What do others think?

Boiler Up!

I'm pretty sure the accurate Lincoln quote is "you miss 100% of the shots you don't take." Or maybe it's "Everything's a dildo if you're brave enough." I forget which, and I can't seem to find my little book of quotations.

 

[ImRonBurgandy?]

I'm pretty sure the accurate Lincoln quote is "you miss 100% of the shots you don't take".

Thought that was attributed to Wayne Gretzky.

 

[MilwaukeeBoilerFan]

What do others think?

Boiler Up!

https://www.foxnews.com/sports/mississippi-tate-reeves-big-ten-pac-12-executive-orders

Governor of Mississippi took a shot at the B1G and Pac-12.

A true leader can admit a mistake, make an adjustment and learn from it. A bad leader stays in denial that the decision is final and will not be re-visited. There is still time, but the window is closing fast with schedules, media coverage, etc. Wonder if the University Presidents have any regrets to this point as well?

Kevin Warren has drawn the line in the sand at this point. If Big12, ACC and SEC get a full season in, he should be given the beer case to clean out desk and told to leave the B1G premises at Rosemont, IL.
If for any reason, covid-19 kicks in and affects those conferences, I'll want to be the first to congratulate Kevin for being a soothsayer and ask for some stock tips as well. I highly doubt that I'll be getting any stock tips soon.

FWIW, googled the quote and it is Henry Ford.
https://www.cpapracticeadvisor.com/...u-think-you-can-or-think-you-cant-youre-right

 

[Pu71indy]

Finebaum hates the B1G. If Warren did everything right, he would still find a way to criticize him for doing things wrong. He is an SEC blowhard.

 

[SIBoiler2]

I read a report today that indicated the biggest hurdle faced by the B1G was Go Witless of Michigan who prohibited UM, M$U, and all Michigan HS teams from playing FB this fall.

 

[Riveting]

The Big 10 is choosing to err on the side of safety of their players, and is willing to pay a great financial cost to do so. There is something noble about that, in my view, however it turns out.

 

[Purdue85]

The Big 10 is choosing to err on the side of safety of their players, and is willing to pay a great financial cost to do so. There is something noble about that, in my view, however it turns out.

there's nothing noble about their decision.

The "safety of the players" argument is really weak. COVID has very little risk for the 0-24 age group.

 

[PurdueDave]

there's nothing noble about their decision.

The "safety of the players" argument is really weak. COVID has very little risk for the 0-24 age group.

Just curious, what do you think their motivate is?

 

[BlkGoldHoops]

The Big 10 is choosing to err on the side of safety of their players, and is willing to pay a great financial cost to do so. There is something noble about that, in my view, however it turns out.

But they are going to let them have 12 hours of full contact practice All fall. What’s the difference?

 

[Purdue85]

Just curious, what do you think their motivate is?

I haven't thought about their "motivate".

I have given a LOT of thought (and study) as it relates to the data and science.

 

[PurdueDave]

I haven't thought about their "motivate".

I have given a LOT of thought (and study) as it relates to the data and science.

Just guessing, but IMO, they're trying to do what they believe is best for the health and safety of their student athletes. Any other motivation makes no sense (I just can't get behind the idea of a massive conspiracy). Maybe it's not as weak as you think?

 

[Purdue85]

Just guessing, but IMO, they're trying to do what they believe is best for the health and safety of their student athletes. Any other motivation makes no sense (I just can't get behind the idea of a massive conspiracy). Maybe it's not as weak as you think?

Not sure why you think there would be thoughts of a conspiracy.

Or, that there's anything ... "weak".

None of what you posted makes sense.

It's entirely rational to question "authority"... no?

If so, I have a novel idea: let's look at the data!

 

[PetesHammer]

The Big 10 is choosing to err on the side of safety of their players, and is willing to pay a great financial cost to do so. There is something noble about that, in my view, however it turns out.

It’s not noble, it’s idiotic

 

[TheGunner]

https://www.foxnews.com/sports/mississippi-tate-reeves-big-ten-pac-12-executive-orders

Governor of Mississippi took a shot at the B1G and Pac-12.

A true leader can admit a mistake, make an adjustment and learn from it. A bad leader stays in denial that the decision is final and will not be re-visited. There is still time, but the window is closing fast with schedules, media coverage, etc. Wonder if the University Presidents have any regrets to this point as well?

Kevin Warren has drawn the line in the sand at this point. If Big12, ACC and SEC get a full season in, he should be given the beer case to clean out desk and told to leave the B1G premises at Rosemont, IL.
If for any reason, covid-19 kicks in and affects those conferences, I'll want to be the first to congratulate Kevin for being a soothsayer and ask for some stock tips as well. I highly doubt that I'll be getting any stock tips soon.

FWIW, googled the quote and it is Henry Ford.
https://www.cpapracticeadvisor.com/firm-management/article/11575149/whether-you-think-you-can-or-think-you-cant-youre-right

RE Ford Quote- I like the quote in the context that if you do not think you can... then you can’t.

But several times I have run into people who think they can and often cannot. In fact I am working on a project today where the project leader continues to miss deadline after deadline, but still believes he will make the next one. (Fool me once...).

 

[PurdueDave]

Not sure why you think there would be thoughts of a conspiracy.

Or, that there's anything ... "weak".

None of what you posted makes sense.

It's entirely rational to question "authority"... no?

If so, I have a novel idea: let's look at the data!

All I'm saying is that their motives may have been noble.... that's it. No data needed. Either they thought they were doing the right thing or there is something more nefarious going on. I simply asked you where you fall with regards to there motivation.

 

[Purdue85]

All I'm saying is that their motives may have been noble.... that's it. No data needed. Either they thought they were doing the right thing or there is something more nefarious going on. I simply asked you where you fall with regards to there motivation.

"...their motives may have been noble..."

I'm stuck on the phrase, "may have been".

I don't care to speculate on their motives. To me, at this moment, their motives are irrelevant.

Of course the data is needed. The data is essential! It's the first step of accountability.

 

[lbodel]

there's nothing noble about their decision.

The "safety of the players" argument is really weak. COVID has very little risk for the 0-24 age group.

Again, Mitch Daniels was not in favor of playing. If Purdue had another president, you'd be villifying him/her.

 

[lbodel]

Just curious, what do you think their motivate is?

At least 10 Big Ten players have developed a heart condition after having COVID. This "it's not a risk" for college age kids is a lovely talking point that 85 has said 5,000 times, but not one that medical experts agree with. Also, again...it has to do with community transmission as well. The 100 football players then go to restaurants, dorms, apartment buildings, stores, etc.

 

[jsglenn4]

The "safety of the players" argument is really weak. COVID has very little risk for the 0-24 age group.

We know far too little about this virus to say there is very little risk to the 0-24 age group. We don't have near enough data about long term and/or collateral effects to know anything.

I do believe it is correct to say we currently have no data to indicate this age group is at increased risk from participating in athletics. The conferences which are moving ahead with football are about to provide additional data.

 

[Riveting]

We know far too little about this virus to say there is very little risk to the 0-24 age group. We don't have near enough data about long term and/or collateral effects to know anything.

I do believe it is correct to say we currently have no data to indicate this age group is at increased risk from participating in athletics. The conferences which are moving ahead with football are about to provide additional data.

Agree.

Given that the medical evidence is not yet conclusive regarding the potential heart issues from covid, my point simply is that the Big 10 choose to err on the side of player health and safety – including possible long-term heart health impact. Other conferences choose to err on the other side – being willing to take a greater chance with the long-term heart health of the players.

What is noble, in my view, is that the Big 10 didn’t just say it is concerned about long-term heart health, but is willing to take a major financial hit to back it up. The conferences planning to play don’t have to make a big sacrifice to back up their decision, at least not yet, so I see nothing noble about what those conferences are doing. In fact, someone could take a position that they are appearing to place financial gain over risks to the long-term health of the players. I do not take that position, instead giving them the benefit of the doubt that they really believe the risk of long-term heart impact is minimal. There are medical experts on both sides of the issue.

It is possible to be both noble and wrong, and I hope that is what happens to the Big 10 in this case for the sake of the long-term heart health of those who will be playing this fall.

 

[Purdue85]

Again, Mitch Daniels was not in favor of playing. If Purdue had another president, you'd be villifying him/her.

Why are you accusing me of "vilifying"? You really seem too sensitive on this topic. It is okay to ask questions, to challenge people, and to have a public discussion.

What's more, we certainly should be able to do that on this open forum without accusing people of "vilifying" others.

 

[Purdue85]

We know far too little about this virus to say there is very little risk to the 0-24 age group. We don't have near enough data about long term and/or collateral effects to know anything.

I do believe it is correct to say we currently have no data to indicate this age group is at increased risk from participating in athletics. The conferences which are moving ahead with football are about to provide additional data.

I've never suggested we know everything about this virus. What we know right now is that this virus poses a very low (mortality) risk to the 0-24 age group.

What's more, we may not know much about the long term effects of this virus until years down the road. If we take that logical conclusion, we shouldn't have sports at all, given how many athletes have been infected.

 

[FirstDownB]

Agree.

Given that the medical evidence is not yet conclusive regarding the potential heart issues from covid, my point simply is that the Big 10 choose to err on the side of player health and safety – including possible long-term heart health impact. Other conferences choose to err on the other side – being willing to take a greater chance with the long-term heart health of the players.

What is noble, in my view, is that the Big 10 didn’t just say it is concerned about long-term heart health, but is willing to take a major financial hit to back it up. The conferences planning to play don’t have to make a big sacrifice to back up their decision, at least not yet, so I see nothing noble about what those conferences are doing. In fact, someone could take a position that they are appearing to place financial gain over risks to the long-term health of the players. I do not take that position, instead giving them the benefit of the doubt that they really believe the risk of long-term heart impact is minimal. There are medical experts on both sides of the issue.

It is possible to be both noble and wrong, and I hope that is what happens to the Big 10 in this case for the sake of the long-term heart health of those who will be playing this fall.

I look at it through a different lens in regards to player health. The conferences that are planning to play are allowing people to make their own decisions about personal risk. They are leading with a lighter touch that errs on the side of not taking away opportunity from people who are ok with the risks. I also think these conferences are being much more consistent in their messaging, from the top down.

 

[Riveting]

I look at it through a different lens in regards to player health. The conferences that are planning to play are allowing people to make their own decisions about personal risk. They are leading with a lighter touch that errs on the side of not taking away opportunity from people who are ok with the risks. I also think thncluese conferences are being much more consistent in their messaging, from the top down.

You are taking a reasonable position, of a type I am usually inclined to agree with. However, this might be a case where the people making their own decisions may not have enough info to truly assess the personal risk.

At any rate, I see that Nick Saban has confirmed that the SEC decision has nothing to do with money, being quoted on espn.com as saying, "Everybody acts like we want to play for the money," he said. "We want to play for the players. I want to play for the players." So, thank goodness for that.

 

[TMFT]

Thought that was attributed to Wayne Gretzky.

I was making a joke. Internet just isn't conducive to my dry Newhart-esque delivery.

 

[SIBoiler2]

I've never suggested we know everything about this virus. What we know right now is that this virus poses a very low (mortality) risk to the 0-24 age group.

What's more, we may not know much about the long term effects of this virus until years down the road. If we take that logical conclusion, we shouldn't have sports at all, given how many athletes have been infected.

I'm expecting that 10 years from now we'll see lawyers filing cases because somebody is claiming alk the disinfectants being used have carcinogens in them.

 

[MilwaukeeBoilerFan]

At least 10 Big Ten players have developed a heart condition after having COVID. This "it's not a risk" for college age kids is a lovely talking point that 85 has said 5,000 times, but not one that medical experts agree with. Also, again...it has to do with community transmission as well. The 100 football players then go to restaurants, dorms, apartment buildings, stores, etc.

How about 5,001 times? If we say it enough, it might sink in. Don't contradict us though, contradict Dr. Ackerman a Cardiologist at Mayo Clinic that specializes in sudden death in young athletes.
https://techhealthi.com/how-a-cardiologist-was-able-to-save-the-college-football-season-al-com/

I know you use a lot of legal jargon. Please put your response in layman's terms and tell us how Dr. Ackerman is wrong. Thanks in advance. BTW, you don't have to respond, I'm just ribbing you.

 

[MilwaukeeBoilerFan]

RE Ford Quote- I like the quote in the context that if you do not think you can... then you can’t.

But several times I have run into people who think they can and often cannot. In fact I am working on a project today where the project leader continues to miss deadline after deadline, but still believes he will make the next one. (Fool me once...).

I like the Project Leaders that let others lag, then compress those at the tail end and still think they can finish on time. I see that all too frequently. Grrr!!!

 

[MilwaukeeBoilerFan]

Why are you accusing me of "vilifying"? You really seem too sensitive on this topic. It is okay to ask questions, to challenge people, and to have a public discussion.

What's more, we certainly should be able to do that on this open forum without accusing people of "vilifying" others.

Asking a rhetorical question: Isn't that what discussion is for? Before casting the vote among Commissioner and Presidents/Chancellors, couldn't the "can" have been kicked down the road for more time to evaluate data in real time while the virus had an uptick and now appears to be trending down again?
Kevin Warren saying the decision is final and won't be re-visited is a failure and teaches future generations to shutdown and quit vs figure out how to make it work. That is just me though.

 

[Coach Geez]

Again, Mitch Daniels was not in favor of playing. If Purdue had another president, you'd be villifying him/her.

Yet he has no problems admitting 40k+ students on campus who will most certainly be the most at-risk people to spread the virus throughout the campus and surrounding community. Spare me the BS about player safety, this is all a money grab. Daniels as well as the other B10 presidents know they can survive a fall without football. However, they know their pockets are going to be HURTING if students aren't on campus. Why do you think these schools are going to online learning AFTER students were initially admitted? Because the tuition dollars have already rolled in.

I just don't know how you or anyone else for that matter can justify 40k+ people on campus but vehemently argue the idea of playing football? It's hypocrisy. If it's all about player safety, there wouldn't be college sports to begin with. I'm not a doctor or medical expert but would be willing to bet a substantial amount of money that college footballs players are more at-risk long term due to the wear and tear on their bodies and brains playing football than the "potential" long term effects of COVID.

 

[Riveting]

Not following you here. Are you saying the Big 10 canceled football as a money grab - that is, to make money?? Wouldn't it be much smarter financially to continue football and, per the rest of your post, go to online learning once the students report - which is what UNC, NC State, and several others are doing?

 

[Coach Geez]

Not following you here. Are you saying the Big 10 canceled football as a money grab - that is, to make money?? Wouldn't it be much smarter financially to continue football and, per the rest of your post, go to online learning once the students report - which is what UNC, NC State, and several others are doing?

No. Admitting students on campus was simply a money grab. It has nothing to do with the actual well-being of the students. It's two-faced for a president say they support the cancellation football citing health and safety reasons while at the same time admitting 40k+ students on campus.

And you don't think it was a strategic ploy to go to online learning AFTER students already paid this falls tuition and were already on campus? What do those schools tuition numbers look like if they made the decision to go online back in June and July? They would have been crushed.

 

[Riveting]

No. Admitting students on campus was simply a money grab. It has nothing to do with the actual well-being of the students. It's two-faced for a president say they support the cancellation football citing health and safety reasons while at the same time admitting 40k+ students on campus.

And you don't think it was a strategic ploy to go to online learning AFTER students already paid this falls tuition and were already on campus? What do those schools tuition numbers look like if they made the decision to go online back in June and July? They would have been crushed.

No. Admitting students on campus was simply a money grab. It has nothing to do with the actual well-being of the students. It's two-faced for a president say they support the cancellation football citing health and safety reasons while at the same time admitting 40k+ students on campus.

And you don't think it was a strategic ploy to go to online learning AFTER students already paid this falls tuition and were already on campus? What do those schools tuition numbers look like if they made the decision to go online back in June and July? They would have been crushed.

I do not see a connection between regular students and football players in this issue. There appears to be legitimate medical concern about athletes suffering long-term heart heath effects from covid that do not apply to regular students, if I understand this NYT article about research at Ohio State correctly:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/23/sports/ncaafootball/college-football-myocarditis-coronavirus.html

 

[Coach Geez]

I do not see a connection between regular students and football players in this issue. There appears to be legitimate medical concern about athletes suffering long-term heart heath effects from covid that do not apply to regular students, if I understand this NYT article about research at Ohio State correctly:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/23/sports/ncaafootball/college-football-myocarditis-coronavirus.html

Is there not legitimate medical concerns about CTE, head trauma, etc where there isn't a regular connection between football players and regular students in any given year? Why is player safety and health all the sudden this huge deal? As I stated above, I would bet a lot to a little that any college football player playing this fall will have more long term damage due to wear and tear on their bodies than potentially catching COVID.

Let's call a spade a spade here. Big Ten presidents knew that could afford to not have a fall season for one year at the risk of potential lawsuits from COVID. The same university presidents also knew they COULDN'T afford to not have students on campus this fall because that risk far less outweighs the long-term effects from COVID for the college-aged demographic. No students on campus = less tuition dollars which is far more crippling to any university than any lawsuit from a student who is asymptomatic.

 

[FirstDownB]

I do not see a connection between regular students and football players in this issue. There appears to be legitimate medical concern about athletes suffering long-term heart heath effects from covid that do not apply to regular students, if I understand this NYT article about research at Ohio State correctly:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/23/sports/ncaafootball/college-football-myocarditis-coronavirus.html

Whoa, so athletes are more at risk than regular Joe's? For the safety of the students, I demand a campus ban on all forms of exercise and for the dining halls to double the supply of pizza.

 

[Riveting]

Interesting viewpoint, but why then did the SEC and ACC presidents not come to the same cost/benefit about the risks of potential lawsuits?

The medical evidence of CTE and football is well established, I believe, so everybody knows, at least in theory, the risks they are taking if they let their kid play football. In contrast, the medical evidence of covid and myocarditis in college football players is not well established, such that people do not currently know what they are getting into if they let their kid play.