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 .
teachercd said:
That fact that as of right now other conferences are playing
Click to expand...
I think this is it. Central Arkansas figuring out how to safely move forward with football, while schools like Michigan can't figure it out, well that's not a great look. If ACC, SEC, Big 12 play this fall, B1G will just look worse and worse. 

 
FrantzHardySwag said:
I think this is it. Central Arkansas figuring out how to safely move forward with football, while schools like Michigan can't figure it out, well that's not a great look. If ACC, SEC, Big 12 play this fall, B1G will just look worse and worse. 
Click to expand...
Winner Winner 

It doesn't help that ISU will play, but not Iowa.  And The Irish are playing, but not Purdue or Indiana.  

 
We can't get lost in the actual logic of playing versus not playing, though; we all pretty much know the decision was about liability in the first place.

As @QMany said, does this actually change the school presidents' votes? Would there really be a re-vote? That's the question to me.

 
FrantzHardySwag said:
I think this is it. Central Arkansas figuring out how to safely move forward with football, while schools like Michigan can't figure it out, well that's not a great look. If ACC, SEC, Big 12 play this fall, B1G will just look worse and worse. 
Click to expand...


I don't know their finances, but a school like UCA might not have their program SURVIVE if they didn't play this year. So there may have been some element of throwing caution to the wind and deciding they have to play no matter the outcome.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the B1G decision from the presidents ultimately boil down to the majority being uncomfortable with secondary health effects of COVID and liability rather than testing deficiencies? The "play ball" crowd advocated that players would be safer inside the rigorous structure teams could provide and that implies testing wasn't the problem.

If that's the case, rapid testing wouldn't really change the calculus of those who voted no, IMO.

 
Danny Bateman said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the B1G decision from the presidents ultimately boil down to the majority being uncomfortable with secondary health effects of COVID and liability rather than testing deficiencies? The "play ball" crowd advocated that players would be safer inside the rigorous structure teams could provide and that implies testing wasn't the problem.
Click to expand...
The problem with this is the JAMA paper that started the Myocarditis scare was bunk, and has since been revised by the authors. They can still try and stand on that leg but its a lot more wobbly than it was a month ago.


 
Danny Bateman said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the B1G decision from the presidents ultimately boil down to the majority being uncomfortable with secondary health effects of COVID and liability rather than testing deficiencies? The "play ball" crowd advocated that players would be safer inside the rigorous structure teams could provide and that implies testing wasn't the problem.

If that's the case, rapid testing wouldn't really change the calculus of those who voted no, IMO.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, the Big Ten wasn't forthcoming with any information and simply hid behind the "there are too many uncertainties" line instead of providing data or answering questions. Their collective ego was strong enough that other conferences would conform if the Big Ten did it. The rapid testing concept will be their get out of the hole card. If they decide to bring football back, they'll using the rapid testing as their trump card and claim that they made the rational decisions throughout the process. Either way, let's hope they can put their egos aside and just get the drama over with already.

 
FrantzHardySwag said:
The problem with this is the JAMA paper that started the Myocarditis scare was bunk, and has since been revised by the authors. They can still try and stand on that leg but its a lot more wobbly than it was a month ago.
Click to expand...


I understand the study they relied on was flawed.

But if that's their rationale and they're sticking to their guns I don't see how shipments of rapid-testing supplies helps change that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wistrom Disciple said:
The regional media partners nor the players & programs in that area have also not been as vocal for bringing sports back. Yes, there is the obvious political angle as well but I think more of the west coast media would rather focus on what color shoes Kanye West is wearing than bringing back college football. 
Click to expand...
Kids should have the same opportunity though. Let's give every state and every conference a chance to succeed. If we have the tests get them to those schools. s#!t, if my choices are more football or less football - gimme more football.

 
FrantzHardySwag said:
Kids should have the same opportunity though. Let's give every state and every conference a chance to succeed. If we have the tests get them to those schools. s#!t, if my choices are more football or less football - gimme more football.
Click to expand...
Agreed, but those players and programs need to speak out and ramp up their voices if they truly want to play. The Big Ten players, parents and coaches were all pretty vocal the past month with the lawsuits, public interviews/conversations and regional media encouragement. Maybe it's been happening on the west coast but I have not heard about anything close to the Big Ten pumping. 

 
Back
Top