Waquoit
Mr. Positive
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 33,556
- Reaction Score
- 88,246
Why not?Calling coaches that want to give it a go irresponsible killers which is basically your view isn’t fair rhetoric.
Why not?Calling coaches that want to give it a go irresponsible killers which is basically your view isn’t fair rhetoric.
It completely disrespects young adults and their own choices and completely ignores all the efforts that are being made here. It’s also just more of the bigger societal discourse problem we have where we grossly overstate situations to make points.Why not?
Because the coaches are ignoring what the presidents can’t.
there were actually a few tweets yesterday from the P12 players that signed calling out other players for their hypocrisy on these issues.
Coaches think they can contain the risk - but they also know they certainly can’t eliminate it.
Personally would I play this fall? Probably would give it a go, but I’m the edge ready to bail as soon as my team had problems.
As for the student athletes arguing on tweeter, this part of the unintended consequences of student organization and student associations. As the idea or organizing comes together it’s going to bring a lot of internal tension to the teams. It’s going to do some good things and some things people will wish never became part of the dynamic. Most kids are there to ball, not there to get wrapped up in a work movement and that will create issues.
If there are coaches that aren’t approaching this with the integrity we have seen from Edsall then they should be ashamed of themselves.My daughter is playing premier soccer and has a game tonight. I am not against athletes playing their sports. But when you're in charge of students and you're compelling them in some way (which the coaches are doing undeniably) then ethical questions become involved, especially when there's this much money at stake. So, keeping safe for local practices when there are 85 kids involved is one thing, but playing a traveling schedule over state lines is quite another.
I still say the particular politics of each state are determining what should be a unanimous decision.
Earlier this week...
Sure... they are other stories out there w/ typical writer/fan speculation but on the surface it’s seems like he has multiple medical/health issues playing out post-Covid. Be interesting to see how he fares over time.That sounds more like a athletic conditioning issue more than a long-term (or even short-term) health issue.
He would hardly be the first player to get any sort of viral infection, or an injury in general, and the recovery took him out of practice/playing shape. You shut them down so they don't get hurt.
Doesn’t sound like it (from Big10 thread):Any chance that Nebraska, maybe Ohio St and a few other football-centric B1G, Pac-12, and ACC (I see the tobacco road Presidents eventually shutting down football at some point in August) joining a majority of SEC and XII schools to form a 'temporary' football conference this fall?
>>When Warren was asked specifically by Yahoo Sports if Nebraska could play college football this fall, he gave an answer that would make his hardline predecessor nod with approval.
“No,” he said, firmly. “Not and be a member of the Big Ten Conference.”
Warren’s concise Nebraska rebuttal is a nice window into the bottom line he used to help guide the decision that may ultimately define his career as Big Ten commissioner. He politely told Nebraska that if it goes rogue, it can pack it where the corn doesn’t husk. And the league would be happy to keep its $50 million cut and share it with those who play nice.<<
Any chance that Nebraska, maybe Ohio St and a few other football-centric B1G, Pac-12, and ACC (I see the tobacco road Presidents eventually shutting down football at some point in August) joining a majority of SEC and XII schools to form a 'temporary' football conference this fall?
Sometimes we make decisions for the general public. Both for their own safety and the safety of others.If you believe 18-21 year olds can’t make this decision about playing ball then you must believe the voting age too low. If they can’t make one section, how can they make any decisions? (I’ll save you the key strokes, I think the drinking age should be rolled back to 19.)
Calling coaches that want to give it a go irresponsible killers which is basically your view isn’t fair rhetoric.
The "young adults" don't have a real choice. And what efforts are being made besides whistling in the dark?It completely disrespects young adults and their own choices and completely ignores all the efforts that are being made here.
And after these boys play that 5th game and then they cancel the season cause to many have to quarantine due to exposure all those kids that played and blew their redshirts will be pissed and another problem will now start!! What a mess.My hunch is the Big 12 and ACC will play some games then give it up. SEC will soldier on. I could see 5he ACC splitting with BC, Syracuse forced out by state leaders and maybe a couple of Virginia, Duke and Carolina and NC State ultimately coming to their senses. If one of the NC schools goes out the remainder will follow. My money is on Duke.
Sometimes we make decisions for the general public. Both for their own safety and the safety of others.
Many more and I'm sure any personal injury lawyers on the site can rattle them off like they would their kids' names.
- Seat belts
- Child safety seats
- Pedestrian walk areas
- Bicycle and/or motorcycle helmets
- Operating under the influence
- Speed limits
What efforts? OMG - okay whatever. No point in having a discussion with those that willfully ignore what is in plain sight.The "young adults" don't have a real choice. And what efforts are being made besides whistling in the dark?
My daughter is playing premier soccer and has a game tonight. I am not against athletes playing their sports. But when you're in charge of students and you're compelling them in some way (which the coaches are doing undeniably) then ethical questions become involved, especially when there's this much money at stake. So, keeping safe for local practices when there are 85 kids involved is one thing, but playing a traveling schedule over state lines is quite another.
I still say the particular politics of each state are determining what should be a unanimous decision.
If there's so many, name two. I just hear boilerplate.What efforts? OMG - okay whatever. No point in having a discussion with those that willfully ignore what is in plain sight.