Will There Be a 2020 Football Season?

Chances of a 2020 season?

  • Full 12 Game Schedule

    Votes: 20 36.4%

  • Shortened Season

    Votes: 13 23.6%

  • No Games Played

    Votes: 22 40.0%
  • Total voters
    55
  • Poll closed .
FrantzHardySwag said:
WTF kinda football season would take place without; Florida, FSU, Miami, Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, Texas AM, TCU, USC, Cal, Arizona, Arizona St, Stanford, UCLA, UCF, USF, Rice, Texas St, Fresno St, San Jose St, San Diego St, FIU, FAU? and that's not to mention every other team looking over their shoulder praying their state doesn't reach hospital capacities and needing to shut it down.
Click to expand...
What kind? The kind that still has Nebraska. 

 
Huskers93-97 said:
If journalism had the same standards as years ago people would trust what we read. 
Click to expand...


If journalism had the same standards as years ago, you'd trust CBS, NBC, and ABC News, The Washington Post, The New York Times, Newsweek and Time.

These days we have a lot more information that we mistake for knowledge. 

But if you want trusted news sources, they're still out there doing their thing, pursuing and weighing opposing viewpoints from relevant sources, vetting their information, making corrections as new evidence emerges. At the very least, they know a lot more than we do.

What they can't do, apparently, is convince someone who read something somewhere on the internet that jibes with their gut feeling.

 
Guy Chamberlin said:
If journalism had the same standards as years ago, you'd trust CBS, NBC, and ABC News, The Washington Post, The New York Times, Newsweek and Time.

These days we have a lot more information that we mistake for knowledge. 

But if you want trusted news sources, they're still out there doing their thing, pursuing and weighing opposing viewpoints from relevant sources, vetting their information, making corrections as new evidence emerges. At the very least, they know a lot more than we do.

What they can't do, apparently, is convince someone who read something somewhere on the internet that jibes with their gut feeling.
Click to expand...
The problem with the media is there are too many personal opinions pieces. I cant believe some of these media outlets have gone that route- it puts someone's opinion and ties it next to their name. All it does is lose viewership from the other side. Wouldnt it make sense to have an unbiased network. Holy s#!t you would control all the united states viewership not just half of it.

 
Huskers93-97 said:
That's half the information. The low risk- less dangerous coronaviruses have not had herd immunity. The more dangerous and virulent versions of coronavirus have had herd immunity. So if you remove selective history and look at all the facts it makes more sense Covid relates to the more dangerous and virulent versions.
Click to expand...
You literally just picked just one example - SARS, which is as selective as you can get. I pointed out that there's other examples that don't fit your conclusion. While one outcome might make more sense to you, that doesn't mean that's what will happen. We don't yet have enough evidence to know either way. I hope herd immunity happens and is strong for years, but I also don't want to pin all my hopes to a solution that's uncertain and has reason to be skeptical of.

 
RedDenver said:
You literally just picked just one example - SARS, which is as selective as you can get. I pointed out that there's other examples that don't fit your conclusion. While one outcome might make more sense to you, that doesn't mean that's what will happen. We don't yet have enough evidence to know either way. I hope herd immunity happens and is strong for years, but I also don't want to pin all my hopes to a solution that's uncertain and has reason to be skeptical of.
Click to expand...
No actually I got that information from a post many pages ago by Knapp. It stated the same thing. The common cold coronaviruses had no herd immunity. But the more dangerous coronaviruses have. So I didnt just pick SARS. Plus even if it was just SARS- that would be the most relevant comparison so yeah it is the best comparison.

 
Huskers93-97 said:
No actually I got that information from a post many pages ago by Knapp. It stated the same thing. The common cold coronaviruses had no herd immunity. But the more dangerous coronaviruses have. So I didnt just pick SARS. Plus even if it was just SARS- that would be the most relevant comparison so yeah it is the best comparison.
Click to expand...
You're claiming SARS is the best comparison. Why? SARS had a fatality rate of about 15% with a fatality rate of 55% for those aged 65+ (link). Covid-19 isn't anywhere close to that (thank goodness).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Huskers93-97 said:
View attachment 17032
Click to expand...


https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommybeer/2020/07/01/research-determines-protests-did-not-cause-spike-in-coronavirus-cases/#205f52387dac

https://time.com/5861633/protests-coronavirus/

https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/06/24/883017035/what-contact-tracing-may-tell-about-cluster-spread-of-the-coronavirus (This one is titled "Parties - Not Protests, Are Causing Spikes in Coronavirus)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/protests-probably-didnt-lead-to-coronavirus-spikes-but-its-hard-to-know-for-sure/2020/06/30/d8179678-baf5-11ea-8cf5-9c1b8d7f84c6_story.html

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/black-lives-matter-protests-haven-t-led-covid-19-spikes-n1232045

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/black-lives-matter-protests-coronavirus-no-surges

https://www.chicagotribune.com/coronavirus/ct-cb-protest-effects-coronavirus-20200622-em4wx6mwmraipjqqmg77yywfha-story.html

https://www.newsweek.com/protests-black-lives-matter-covid19-coronavirus-1512501

https://www.inquirer.com/health/coronavirus/coronavirus-no-spike-cities-despite-protests-big-surge-in-states-that-reopened-20200627.html

https://nypost.com/2020/06/24/blm-protests-have-not-led-to-a-spike-in-coronavirus-cases-study/

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/06/protests-covid-outdoor-masks.html

Would you like me to keep going?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cdog923 said:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommybeer/2020/07/01/research-determines-protests-did-not-cause-spike-in-coronavirus-cases/#205f52387dac

https://time.com/5861633/protests-coronavirus/

https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/06/24/883017035/what-contact-tracing-may-tell-about-cluster-spread-of-the-coronavirus (This one is titled "Parties - Not Protests, Are Causing Spikes in Coronavirus)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/protests-probably-didnt-lead-to-coronavirus-spikes-but-its-hard-to-know-for-sure/2020/06/30/d8179678-baf5-11ea-8cf5-9c1b8d7f84c6_story.html

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/black-lives-matter-protests-haven-t-led-covid-19-spikes-n1232045

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/black-lives-matter-protests-coronavirus-no-surges

https://www.chicagotribune.com/coronavirus/ct-cb-protest-effects-coronavirus-20200622-em4wx6mwmraipjqqmg77yywfha-story.html

https://www.newsweek.com/protests-black-lives-matter-covid19-coronavirus-1512501

https://www.inquirer.com/health/coronavirus/coronavirus-no-spike-cities-despite-protests-big-surge-in-states-that-reopened-20200627.html

https://nypost.com/2020/06/24/blm-protests-have-not-led-to-a-spike-in-coronavirus-cases-study/

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/06/protests-covid-outdoor-masks.html
Click to expand...
Not going to read them all. But this is great evidence to support we will have a football season. Lets hold a protest at memorial stadium every saturday.

 
Huskers93-97 said:
What kind? The kind that still has Nebraska. 
Click to expand...
I mean is that a season? No title would be credible. But I agree we could have a series of scrimmages with say Iowa, ISU, Kansas, K-State, Missouri. But if portions of the ACC, SEC, Big 12, and Pac 12 are unable to play - the season would have no value. 

 
Huskers93-97 said:
Here is my question. Can anyone answer this. What is the actual goal at this point with the virus?  First it was keep hospitals from getting overloaded, we dont have enough ventilators- do your part. Then somehow it turned into stop the spread completely. 

If hospitals are not overloaded, death rates are going down compared to infection numbers. So if masses of people are getting infected but hospitals are not overloaded and deaths are occuring at a low rate. What is the goal? Do we want to go back to shutting down the economy, have more people lose jobs to protect a small percentage of the population of the elderly and immune compromised from serious complications or death? Or is the smart path to protect the small percentage and find a way to resume life for the other 95% of the population? 

I dont have the answers- I dont claim to be all knowing. I am asking common sense questions. Fear in the masses can cause hysteria and people to act irrationally.
Click to expand...


The original goal was to keep hospitals from getting overloaded. The current goal is to keep hospitals from getting overloaded.

There's a point where dead people, hospitalized people, and sick-at-home people will also devastate the economy. No one said the choices were easy, but a long history of global pandemics suggests extreme caution.

The people who recommended this approach never said we could stop the spread completely, just limit its damage. That hasn't changed.

We reopened the economy and relaxed restrictions. The virus surged back, notably in states that escaped the first wave and/or mocked its seriousness. Hospitals are now getting overloaded. Rinse and repeat. 

I see people working really hard to get as much as possible back to normal, including sports. They are listening to the science, stats, and other countries. And believe it or not, the vast majority of politicians need it to work, too. There is no political upside to shutting down beaches for the Fourth of July. 

 
Back
Top