O/U: How many games this season?
- Thread starter DAC17
- Start date
- Status
Obviously there will be bumps in the road , but at the very least , don’t we have time on our side ? What’s the big deal if season gets pushed into April or early May if there is a full shutdown fir a few weeks in January? What’s the burning rush to fit all these games in by early March? Why not give everyone some room on the back end of season? Because the flipside is , if you wanna jam everything in before March you might end up losing the entire season - who cares if it ends in May? I don’t - especially if the other option is a blown up season.
borninansonia
Neandertal
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 430
- Reaction Score
- 2,110
13 "regular season" games, no Big East tournament, and then 6 NCAA tournament games
Total of 19
Total of 19
BParkDog
I will see number 5.
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2020
- Messages
- 154
- Reaction Score
- 1,130
If the protocols remain the same as they are right now - that is, one positive 40 cycle PCR test means games get cancelled, then I'm going with 12 on the U/O, including post season.
PCR tests are very specific and very good at finding extremely small amounts of nucleic acid. Ran many when I was a gene jockey. If a person has even a tiny amount of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in his/her nose, then a 40 cycle PCR test is going to result in a + test result, and, given the specificity of nucleic acid sequences, it's fair to say that the target portion of the SARS-CoV-2 genome was in the subject's nose. But that doesn't mean the person was, at the time of testing, infected and capable of spreading the virus, which, ultimately, is all that matters to team sports. It just means there was nucleic acid from SARS-CoV-2 in his/her nose. Could be residual from a prior infection. Could be resultant from a viral load that is extremely low, meaning the person is effectively non-contagious. Could be environmentally inert RNA.
If a positive test on a 40 cycle PCR amplification remains the standard, and a positive test means that the team cannot play and some period of quarantine is required, then the season is all but shot. No bubble is going to work, if you put 68 teams, which means, what? 2,000 people in one place. This isn't the NBA.
The only way I can see any meaningful basketball being played would be if they change the protocol to something like this:
1. Test regularly - daily if needed.
2. Anybody testing negative can play, regardless of "tracing" contacts.
3. Anybody testing positive sits for whatever the medically accepted minimum quarantine is OR until they have 2 repeated negative tests, whichever occurs sooner. Could be the same day in the case of false positives.
The problem, of course, is that we are not being guided completely by science here - most people are extremely emotional about this issue (in all directions), and that is going to heavily impact what happens going forward.
Further, how can any of us justify college sports if we believe that young people will significantly spread the virus and that virus hospitalization rates are unacceptably high? It seems to me plain that, if California is correct, and there is a current need for a one month stay-at-home lockdown and restricted public interaction, then how on earth can we justify thousands of student athletes being face to face, maskless, transferring respiratory droplets to each other while heavily exerting themselves? Of course we can't. That's a non sequitur.
Could there be a vaccine that saves the season? Maybe. Would love to see it.
But even with a vaccine, there are still going to be Covid-19 associated deaths. Even with widespread availability of an influenza vaccine, about 40,000 people die every year in the U.S. from the flu.
How is the country going to manage SARS-CoV-2 after vaccine administration begins? If we can reduce Covid-19 associated deaths to 40,000 a year, do we then go back to sports? Or is 40,000 too many? And if we can get that number to 20,000 if we have permanent stay-at-home, distancing, masking, and no sports, is that the right answer?
On a side note, a former VP of Pfizer (Dr. Michael Yeadon) just filed an emergency petition with the EMA asking for a halt to all SARS-CoV-2 vaccine trials in the EU, so nothing is a given . . .
PCR tests are very specific and very good at finding extremely small amounts of nucleic acid. Ran many when I was a gene jockey. If a person has even a tiny amount of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in his/her nose, then a 40 cycle PCR test is going to result in a + test result, and, given the specificity of nucleic acid sequences, it's fair to say that the target portion of the SARS-CoV-2 genome was in the subject's nose. But that doesn't mean the person was, at the time of testing, infected and capable of spreading the virus, which, ultimately, is all that matters to team sports. It just means there was nucleic acid from SARS-CoV-2 in his/her nose. Could be residual from a prior infection. Could be resultant from a viral load that is extremely low, meaning the person is effectively non-contagious. Could be environmentally inert RNA.
If a positive test on a 40 cycle PCR amplification remains the standard, and a positive test means that the team cannot play and some period of quarantine is required, then the season is all but shot. No bubble is going to work, if you put 68 teams, which means, what? 2,000 people in one place. This isn't the NBA.
The only way I can see any meaningful basketball being played would be if they change the protocol to something like this:
1. Test regularly - daily if needed.
2. Anybody testing negative can play, regardless of "tracing" contacts.
3. Anybody testing positive sits for whatever the medically accepted minimum quarantine is OR until they have 2 repeated negative tests, whichever occurs sooner. Could be the same day in the case of false positives.
The problem, of course, is that we are not being guided completely by science here - most people are extremely emotional about this issue (in all directions), and that is going to heavily impact what happens going forward.
Further, how can any of us justify college sports if we believe that young people will significantly spread the virus and that virus hospitalization rates are unacceptably high? It seems to me plain that, if California is correct, and there is a current need for a one month stay-at-home lockdown and restricted public interaction, then how on earth can we justify thousands of student athletes being face to face, maskless, transferring respiratory droplets to each other while heavily exerting themselves? Of course we can't. That's a non sequitur.
Could there be a vaccine that saves the season? Maybe. Would love to see it.
But even with a vaccine, there are still going to be Covid-19 associated deaths. Even with widespread availability of an influenza vaccine, about 40,000 people die every year in the U.S. from the flu.
How is the country going to manage SARS-CoV-2 after vaccine administration begins? If we can reduce Covid-19 associated deaths to 40,000 a year, do we then go back to sports? Or is 40,000 too many? And if we can get that number to 20,000 if we have permanent stay-at-home, distancing, masking, and no sports, is that the right answer?
On a side note, a former VP of Pfizer (Dr. Michael Yeadon) just filed an emergency petition with the EMA asking for a halt to all SARS-CoV-2 vaccine trials in the EU, so nothing is a given . . .
.-.
BParkDog
I will see number 5.
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2020
- Messages
- 154
- Reaction Score
- 1,130
Does this mean that you think we're going to play a full season?
I'd absolutely love for you to be correct on that.
20
DAC17
Once upon a time, would never miss a game
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2016
- Messages
- 155
- Reaction Score
- 232
I would too, but then it depends on the quality of the opponents. Nothing is a given this year.
.-.
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2014
- Messages
- 1,595
- Reaction Score
- 5,032
Undefeated season!
McLovin
Gangstas, what's up?
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2018
- Messages
- 2,954
- Reaction Score
- 18,698
This didn’t age well.
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 13,905
- Reaction Score
- 25,921
I’ve said all along that we will play 16. I still think that is doable. While I would shut down until February and move things back so you can have April Agita instead of March Madness, an alternate would be to set the schedule as an East West thing for a few weeks. Try to minimize travel. So have a pod of UConn, Providence St Johns and Seton Hall, for example. Play each team twice. Just like everything else, the fewer outside interactions you have the better. I’m not that worried about having to play some number to make the tourney this year. If it happens it will be in effect a giant invitational. Team goes 11-1 or 10-2 they will and should get in. RPI and its offspring are more meaningless that usual this year because of the lack of interleague play and the numerous interruptions in the schedule. K’s proposal for an open tourney actually might make sense this year. Start April 1 with pall 300 plus D1 teams and see who is left by May 1.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2014
- Messages
- 1,395
- Reaction Score
- 14,238
Yea not the best post looking back on it but still think we get in more than 8-12 games which was a pretty common guess range on this thread
temery
Am I Voldemort
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2011
- Messages
- 22,218
- Reaction Score
- 63,740
Isn't this thread four days old? Very few posts age well on the internet, especially after four days. This one has aged well, all things considered.
Tough call ..Maybe regional pods for BE..Like a Northeast BE pod/bubble scenario.. Including Nova.. And a Midwest BE pod/bubble..Limited travel between the two pods for BE teams if at all....OOC games would need to be given great scrutiny.. Geographic proximity has a high value and preferably with access to a previously vetted bubble site as the game site..I think we'll know more once we get through the Holiday surge scenario that Fauci is predicting.. If we get through that in decent shape.. Still think 15-17 games.. Tournament may have to be pushed out to April/May per Pitino suggestion to be safer for all involved..Health and safety is what matters.
Last edited:
.-.
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2012
- Messages
- 1,632
- Reaction Score
- 3,858
I won't even make a prediction because I have no idea....
Hypothetically speaking, if these kids can get the vaccine by March or April (who actually knows), would it make sense to up the games and tournament in the spring? Obviously college baseball plays pretty late into the early summer so maybe why not hoops (hopefully not that late)? Essentially once they are all vaccinated they sign a waiver about the risks of playing- their decision to play or not to play and we go about our normal lives. Just a thought... I think coach K offered up a similar thought.
Hypothetically speaking, if these kids can get the vaccine by March or April (who actually knows), would it make sense to up the games and tournament in the spring? Obviously college baseball plays pretty late into the early summer so maybe why not hoops (hopefully not that late)? Essentially once they are all vaccinated they sign a waiver about the risks of playing- their decision to play or not to play and we go about our normal lives. Just a thought... I think coach K offered up a similar thought.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2014
- Messages
- 1,395
- Reaction Score
- 14,238
I guess I’m Mr Optimist on this board but the “good” thing that I see is that Big East is replacing games. For example, St John’s shouldn’t really miss a beat this week because our game vs them was swapped out for another opponent. So as long as we follow protocols and avoid the virus to some extent going forward (which is a whole different discussion - we’ve had 2 stops this season and Benedict said there were other stops over the summer so something might be broken protocol-wise) we hopefully wouldn’t be too negatively impacted by our BE opponents getting hit as hopefully games will be rearranged.
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 13,905
- Reaction Score
- 25,921
No doubt college basketball players are at the top of the list. Hell, screw health care workers, first responders, seniors, teachers, regular folks at higher risk. We want to hav3 the Tournament so move them to the top of the list. Hard to believe the CDC didn’t do that. Must have made a mistake...
I know that isn’t what you are advocating but I have no doubt somebody is thinking that...
WeAreUCONN
Why So Serious ¿
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2014
- Messages
- 1,856
- Reaction Score
- 5,832
Under 4
.-.
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2012
- Messages
- 1,632
- Reaction Score
- 3,858
Dude I said March or April not January or February. You have some issues.
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2016
- Messages
- 1,927
- Reaction Score
- 13,003
8
Aren't health care workers the ones that dropped the ball on this? This is a medical crisis and nothing has been done to improve the situation. As usual the big ego medical profession has gotten a pass. What other profession is presented with a problem, makes no progress, then are called heroes?
.-.
- Status