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 .
BIG ERN said:
You can have rape scandals in the B10 - just cannot want to play football if you want to be in this conference!
Click to expand...


giphy.gif


 
Frustrated said:
I don't want to get into a fight.  but I don't have a voice in how my company is run.  I am not in management.  I am, however, a professional responsible for essentially running my business.  The notion that college football players don't get paid is laughable to me.  I was a student-athlete back in my day and there is so much compensation provided to these kids compared to other students it's laughable to me when people scream to pay them.  These kids aren't Roman Gladiators, they are students!  Who are expected to go to class, do their homework, get good grades AND perform at a high level on the field.  Yes, it can be done.  No, they don't need to "get paid"  How much is out of state tuition at NU???  FFS

We are all pissed that there is no football.  Who is willing to admit that is because as a whole, we argued and fought and refused to put a damn mask on?  I KNOW that is why we can't have football.  Next time you're at the Super Saver and see 'ol Cooter without a mask, thank him for ruining college football season for everybody.
Click to expand...
or you could thank him for leading the herd immunity charge to protect the immunocompromised. Seriously people...we never shut the county down to eradicate the disease. It was to flatten the curve to keep hospitals from being overwhelmed because that was the worst case scenario. Now we see the complications and death toll extremely low. Back to normal life. Or we can ruin our financial futures and not build up our natural immunity and keep chasing an evolving virus with a vaccine...but ho ahead. Wear your masks that have holes too big to stop this tiny virus.

 
irafreak said:
or you could thank him for leading the herd immunity charge to protect the immunocompromised. Seriously people...we never shut the county down to eradicate the disease. It was to flatten the curve to keep hospitals from being overwhelmed because that was the worst case scenario. Now we see the complications and death toll extremely low. Back to normal life. Or we can ruin our financial futures and not build up our natural immunity and keep chasing an evolving virus with a vaccine...but ho ahead. Wear your masks that have holes too big to stop this tiny virus.
Click to expand...
evidence aplenty that masks reduce spread but keep denying that science!

 
irafreak said:
or you could thank him for leading the herd immunity charge to protect the immunocompromised. Seriously people...we never shut the county down to eradicate the disease. It was to flatten the curve to keep hospitals from being overwhelmed because that was the worst case scenario. Now we see the complications and death toll extremely low. Back to normal life. Or we can ruin our financial futures and not build up our natural immunity and keep chasing an evolving virus with a vaccine...but ho ahead. Wear your masks that have holes too big to stop this tiny virus.
Click to expand...


Depends on what your definition of "extremely low" is.

The U.S. has now lost more people to Covid-19 than all our wars besides WW1, WW2 or the Civil War COMBINED. Or we've lost more than WW1 on its own. It's equal to roughly 55 9/11's at this point.

Achieving herd immunity would require infection and death numbers to skyrocket.

Everyone has a different idea of what acceptable levels of collateral damage are, I suppose.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nebfanatic said:
evidence aplenty that masks reduce spread but keep denying that science!
Click to expand...
I'm not arguing the spread...I'm arguing this silly notion that we can make it disappear by wearing masks long enough to develop a vaccine...we have a built in cure. And studies have demonstrated time after time that the natural exposure to illness creates a stronger and longer lasting defense against a disease than an artificially created response (hence the need for booster shots). So I would say that is the science we should be focused on. 

 
Danny Bateman said:
Depends on what your definition of "extremely low" is.

The U.S. has now lost more people to Covid-19 than all our wars besides WW1, WW2 or the Civil War COMBINED. Or we've lost more than WW1 on its own. It's equal to roughly 55 9/11's at this point.

Achieving herd immunity would require infection and death numbers to skyrocket.

Everyone has a different idea of what acceptable levels of collateral damage are, I suppose.
Click to expand...
We've lost more to this than to lung cancer last year which is the deadliest cancer in the US. In no way is the death toll extremely low.

 
irafreak said:
I'm not arguing the spread...I'm arguing this silly notion that we can make it disappear by wearing masks long enough to develop a vaccine...we have a built in cure. And studies have demonstrated time after time that the natural exposure to illness creates a stronger and longer lasting defense against a disease than an artificially created response (hence the need for booster shots). So I would say that is the science we should be focused on. 
Click to expand...
Never said we could make it disappear.  I have a science undergrad degree.  but it is absolutely undeniable that if we all did our part we could SLOW the spread of this thing that keeps ruining everything nice.  I was making a joke.  But whatever.

 
irafreak said:
I'm not arguing the spread...I'm arguing this silly notion that we can make it disappear by wearing masks long enough to develop a vaccine...we have a built in cure. And studies have demonstrated time after time that the natural exposure to illness creates a stronger and longer lasting defense against a disease than an artificially created response (hence the need for booster shots). So I would say that is the science we should be focused on. 
Click to expand...
no one is arguing that masks will make it disappear. If someone has said that feel free to quote that post. Reducing the spread would mean considerably less cases and deaths though, which would mean we could probably play football. Scientists have looked at herd immunity. Most have determined going for that as fast as possible without a vaccine is a deadly option. Instead, slowing the spread and giving time to create better therapies and ultimately a vaccine seems to be the safer option. Time will tell, but it appears a consistent approach tends to work better than patchwork advisories. 

 
The generic 'whether or not masks work' debate/conversation has been fleshed out enough in this thread. If folks want to have that conversation, please take it to the COVID thread in the Lounge or the P&R forum.

 
Danny Bateman said:
Depends on what your definition of "extremely low" is.

The U.S. has now lost more people to Covid-19 than all our wars besides WW1, WW2 or the Civil War COMBINED. Or we've lost more than WW1 on its own. It's equal to roughly 55 9/11's at this point.

Achieving herd immunity would require infection and death numbers to skyrocket.

Everyone has a different idea of what acceptable levels of collateral damage are, I suppose.
Click to expand...
Apples to oranges. The population in ww2 for example, was much lower than what it is now. More people, more deaths. So 131 million and 100k deaths is 7.5%. But we have to consider the fact that only 12 million were actually in the military fighting is now 0.8%...so less than a percent.   

Now covid. Us population 328 million. 165k deaths. 0.05%....not even a 10th of a percent. So when we get to 2.6 million deaths...then we're at 0.8% equivalent to ww2. 

Again...this is not going to magically disappear. I'm simply making the argument that the responsible thing to do for the elderly and immumocompromised could be to use our immune system to build that immunity.  We won't know until we have more data, but I'm making my choice based on my research and education.  You have no right to tell me what I should be doing and I'm not going to tell you what to do either.  It just mystifies me how people aren't open to debate on issues anymore. (Not directing that last sentence towards anyone in particular)

 
Nebfanatic said:
no one is arguing that masks will make it disappear. If someone has said that feel free to quote that post. Reducing the spread would mean considerably less cases and deaths though, which would mean we could probably play football. Scientists have looked at herd immunity. Most have determined going for that as fast as possible without a vaccine is a deadly option. Instead, slowing the spread and giving time to create better therapies and ultimately a vaccine seems to be the safer option. Time will tell, but it appears a consistent approach tends to work better than patchwork advisories. 
Click to expand...
This, I agree with. I'm fine with slowing to build therapies for those that do have complications. I just think the mask creates problems too...like breathing in bacterial growth because people don't wash them or use disposables. 

We also don't have unlimited time to stay shut down. We have to live life and keep our country afloat. 

As far as the heard immunity, I think the time is now. We have enough therapies is we could keep big pharma away from hydroxychloriquine...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top