B1G voted 11-3 not to play football this fall
breaking just now by Nicole Auerbach
https://twitter.com/NicoleAuerbach/status/1300541282297806855?s=20
August 31st, 2020 at 5:17 PM ^
Her Athletic article does not list the three dissenters, but I think we can all guess.
From the article, "On August 18, Warren confirmed that there had been a formal vote taken and that it was “overwhelmingly in support of postponing fall sports and will not be revisited.” When speaking to The Athletic about the lack of specificity, he said, “it’s important just to recognize that a vote from our chancellors and presidents was in support of postponing the fall season. We don’t want to get in a position where it’s, ‘Who voted for what?’ ”
August 31st, 2020 at 5:22 PM ^
Nebraska, Iowa and The Ohio State?
August 31st, 2020 at 5:23 PM ^
Yeah based on everything I'm gonna go ahead and guess Schlissel did not vote in favor of playing
August 31st, 2020 at 5:24 PM ^
Yes - probably Iowa and not Michigan. I made my edit.
August 31st, 2020 at 7:57 PM ^
I would have guessed Northwestern....that damn football factory!
August 31st, 2020 at 8:07 PM ^
The same Iowa team that just paused workouts after 11 positive rona tests? Too funny.
August 31st, 2020 at 5:19 PM ^
Thank God, I can finally sleep in peace.
August 31st, 2020 at 5:21 PM ^
The truth shall set us free.
August 31st, 2020 at 9:15 PM ^
Two weeks from now, they’ll be reporting it was 10-4.
By my math, we will have a majority in favor of playing by Halloween.
August 31st, 2020 at 5:24 PM ^
Should we trust the two leagues that have prestigous academic institutions like Michigan, Berkley, Stanford and Northwestern. Or trust the decision made by leagues who care about nothing else other than football, including the well fare of their students and athletes?
August 31st, 2020 at 5:27 PM ^
Did they have good eats in their well fare? It probably contributed to their positive state of welfare.
August 31st, 2020 at 5:39 PM ^
The Michigan Difference. We take lighthearted shots at each other about grammar and spelling instead of devolving into cheap shots about our mothers.
August 31st, 2020 at 6:37 PM ^
Ah, your mother swims after troop ships.
August 31st, 2020 at 10:50 PM ^
Ah, your mother uses apostrophes when she wants to make a noun plural.
September 1st, 2020 at 2:40 AM ^
Overusing apostrophes is the new thing. I don't understand it.
September 1st, 2020 at 4:56 AM ^
Some one here agree's with you.
September 1st, 2020 at 8:28 AM ^
And your mother wears army boots.
September 1st, 2020 at 5:22 AM ^
Ah, your mother was used more than an Oxford comma.
September 1st, 2020 at 9:44 AM ^
And such discussions rarely descend into abusive profanity, which is disruptive and contributes nothing to the topic.
Perhaps comments on language usage might serve as a strategy to encourage a shift to a more thoughtful state of mind when discussion degenerates into an exchange of insults? (Sir, 'lead' and 'led' do NOT mean the same thing . . . .) Or would it merely intensify the rage?
Haste, mistyping, and auto-correct don't help, unfortunately, and proof-reading has never been anyone's favorite activity. It may even be considered a four-letter word by some?
We pedants are a threatened species, but we have not lost our sense of humor.
September 2nd, 2020 at 8:32 AM ^
A Pedanticism major with a Humor minor was my degree at U of M.
September 2nd, 2020 at 9:04 AM ^
The Michigan Difference.
Go Blue!
September 1st, 2020 at 8:55 AM ^
Come on. He's clearly referring to the fee to be paid for traveling to the well. Everyone's got to drink.
August 31st, 2020 at 5:54 PM ^
To be fair, the ACC does have Duke, UVA, Wake Forest, GT, and UNC (all top 30 to USNWR and not perennially top fball programs), but I guess they're offset by the likes of Clemson, Miami, and FSU
And the SEC does have Vandy, but their dissent would be like peeing into the wind.
August 31st, 2020 at 6:03 PM ^
To also be fair, The Dukes, North Carolinas, UVA's, etc. do not want to do anything to piss of the NCAA when it comes to their true sport. Basketball. So they will take one for the team when it comes to playing football this year.
August 31st, 2020 at 6:10 PM ^
Since every other NCAA fall sport (including D-II and D-III football) is cancelled, why do you think the ACC's decision to play football would be favored by the NCAA?
August 31st, 2020 at 6:24 PM ^
Are you for real? Or did you just smoke too much of that $$$$$ weed today?
August 31st, 2020 at 6:18 PM ^
Fair enough. The comment was more targeted towards the SEC and BIG 12. I'm actually surprised the ACC is pushing forward. A Clemson national championship must mean a lot to them.
August 31st, 2020 at 5:56 PM ^
The ACC has Duke, UNC, Wake Forest, UVa. That top 4 is at least equivalent to the Big10 top 4 schools of Michigan, Northwestern, and likely 2 of the 3 of Wisconsin, Illinois and Purdue.
August 31st, 2020 at 6:46 PM ^
Duke and Vandy are ranked higher than all you mentioned (...will give you NW is on par with Duke and Vandy tho)
August 31st, 2020 at 7:18 PM ^
Ah yes, the noble University of Michigan and Dr. Mark Schlissel, who decided to have kids come back to campus (at least until the add/drop deadline). And alumni wonder why Michigan has a reputation for arrogance...
August 31st, 2020 at 8:56 PM ^
Thank you. It’s a ? take to vote against playing football, with the precautions they took, and then allow students back so they can charge room n board. The defenders of this are delusional. Kids are on campus, they should have played.
August 31st, 2020 at 9:12 PM ^
A few counter arguments to consider:
1. It is a university who’s primary purpose is actually educating students
2. A typical college student is much less at risk of the most severe risks of myocarditis than someone playing a very strenuous sport
3. In most schools, football teams are using much more of a key limited resource in the fight against covid, rapid tests, then the general student body (there are certainly a small number of colleges doing significant amounts of rapid turn around testing where this is not true).
4. There are multiple big ten schools where students aren’t back on campus.
August 31st, 2020 at 10:21 PM ^
2. Myocarditis, as pointed out by an esteemed UM cardiologist, is rare and not a reason not to play. You can also get it from many other illnesses. Unlike those other illnesses, the players would have been screened for it if they had tested positive.
3. The revenue that paid for the disproportionate funds for testing players would have more than been made up by the revenue. NO student would have been denied a test that they would get today if the team was playing. Not one. The only difference is the players will now likely get less testing.
4. Strawman. UM isn’t one of those school so the point is irrelevant. It’s too dangerous to have UM play against other athletes who have been tested twice a week, but now we are going to invite students back, to collect the room and board $, with other students who do not have the testing protocols the team had.
August 31st, 2020 at 10:51 PM ^
2. Plenty of Drs disagree. There is certainly a strong suggestion that the big ten presidents listened to Drs that disagreed
3. If one believes this post from the blog yesterday, you are incorrect. https://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/potential-impact-communities-where-cfb-being-played-during-covid-19. There have been suggestions that one of the reasons that the big ten is considering playing again is positive news about more rapid testing. That would also suggest you are incorrect.
August 31st, 2020 at 11:20 PM ^
3. You’re missing the key point, the football team is paying for those tests, their revenue funds the testing for the team, that’s the entire point. Resources for testing the team are not limited in a practice test.
If you believe the team, playing against another team that was also tested twice a week is too risky, but they are doing to be safe at a house party, you’re wrong but entitled to your belief. The team was disciplined in following their protocols and it worked, just look at their positivity rate. Look at Iowa to see what happens and what kids do when they know they are no longer playing this fall. We are Leaders and Best, but Cincinnati can pull this off and we can’t.
How many non football players would have an MRI for testing of myocarditis if they got Covid? Every player would have had that testing. If you truly believe the players are safer not playing, I am not going to change your mind. Leaders and Best would have kept their team safe. In this case they caved to the Governor. That is what I would call being politically safe, not leadership or being best.
September 1st, 2020 at 7:43 AM ^
" You’re missing the key point, the football team is paying for those tests, their revenue funds the testing for the team, that’s the entire point. "
No - the point is that there aren't enough tests in total. The football team paying for them out of their revenue doesn't create more tests out of thin air.
September 1st, 2020 at 9:38 AM ^
2. We do know that covid affects the elderly, people with pre existing conditions, and obese people disproportionately. So while the risk might be minuscule for the RB, WR, and DB position groups, what about lineman who are pushing 300 lbs? A lot of these players probably already have heart problems, especially since they are expected to gain weight so quickly (15-30 lbs per year?). Add onto that the strenuous activities that they need to participate in sounds like a recipe for disaster. We already have a pro athlete (Former FSU center, 7'1") die from a heart attack after having covid. Football is just a game.
August 31st, 2020 at 10:09 PM ^
I'm sure many students and parents would be pretty upset if all their classes (labs etc that have to be in person) were online or cancelled because the University prioritized playing a football season. The priority should be to do everything possible to have as complete of a school year as possible. Football is only one of many departments these schools have to manage. If a school voted to cancel the football season in order to have the best chance to have in person physics labs, i applaud them.
Again, I know i'm saying this on a college football forum but...There are more important things than college football, including providing the best education for universities students.
September 1st, 2020 at 9:21 AM ^
I'm sure many students and parents would find it absolutely ludicrous that it's ok for the students to mingle with 30K people but that 85 people on the football team that are being tested three times per week and more or less isolated are going to be what gets them sick.
I'm sure many students and parents would find it absolutely ludicrous to send the students to campus to most likely be locked into paying room and board, then once the outbreaks happen (not due to the football team) they get sent back home to finish the year out online.
"If a school voted to cancel the football season in order to have the best chance to have in person physics labs, i applaud them."--I'm sure this was their motivation. They said, listen guys...I know out football team is being separated for the most part from the rest of campus, we are testing them twice per week and limiting their exposure to everyone. I know the rest of our students are at parties together with no masks and not social distancing, traveling to and from home whenever they please. Hell I know we have 30K students that are largely going to spread this, but 85 football players that are most likely going to prevent spread to anyone. But let's shut down football because we need those physics labs.
September 1st, 2020 at 1:19 PM ^
Believe it or not, there is a large segment of the student population who do not give two shits about football and actually care about getting the best education they can have. If certain curriculum require in person activities, those should take priority, period. Not an extracurricular activity.
I'm not pro bringing in all the students either. But students that need to be in person should be given priority to stay on campus and have those classes. If that means that there is no football and that 90% of other classes remain online and the majority of campus is closed then that is what should happen.
But approaching the situation as if nothing in the world has changed is irresponsible. The decisions being made are reflective of the values of each university. Clearly majority of the SEC, ACC, BIG 12, OSU, Nebraska, and Iowa all do not take the pandemic as seriously as the UM and others who voted against a season. Clearly the former care more about revenue and sports acclaim than they do about the health of their student body. Even if you don't think safety and education were primary driving forces in the decision, taking these precautions is definitely better than blindly walking into the situation and hoping everything will be fine.
September 1st, 2020 at 2:26 PM ^
Does the large segment of the student population that doesn't care about football also not care about partying? Because right now there is no football, but still plenty of partying. Let's not act like these students are locked down in their dorms studying all day and night being good little social distancers.
I agree about first priority on any college campus right now is keeping anyone that relies on in person instruction, labs, etc. in classes. Your comment about if 90% of classes are online and there is no football, I can get behind it. The problem is only one is happening.
Approaching the situation as if nothing in the world has changed is what you think would be happening if they played a season? Have you read the precautions that were taken in food prep, gym hours, cleaning, limiting areas where groups congregate? Have you read about the amount of testing being done and the fact that the players are pretty much isolated from the rest of campus? That's what you think acting like nothing has changed looks like?
Football does not have to happen on college campuses this fall. Football teams are not going to be the main source of outbreaks if football happens on college campuses this fall. Both of these statements can be true. The problem is how the University (you suggested UM is taking the pandemic much more seriously than other schools and conferences) thinks that by eliminating 85 students they are somehow taking the moral high ground, while they jam 30K undergrads onto campus and say let's go, because they don't want to miss out on that money.
September 1st, 2020 at 8:31 AM ^
Loads of arrogance on this blog.
August 31st, 2020 at 5:24 PM ^
So we're going 11-3 whenever a (normal season) starts back up?
August 31st, 2020 at 5:35 PM ^
Except that you are going 3-9.
August 31st, 2020 at 5:26 PM ^
New things to yell about.
Then we'll get the names of the 3 votes to play, and we'll have even MORE things to yell about.
August 31st, 2020 at 5:26 PM ^
I don't know why this couldn't have been announced 20 days ago. But now we know.
August 31st, 2020 at 5:31 PM ^
And apparently the bylaws say you need 60% to pass such a measure, so they cleared that bar fairly easily.
August 31st, 2020 at 6:12 PM ^
So if the vote was 8 - 6, no sir Charley. Brilliant!
August 31st, 2020 at 7:14 PM ^
Bylaws? Putin don’t need no stinkin’ bylaws!
August 31st, 2020 at 5:50 PM ^
So the first reports had a vote at 12-2, if I remember correctly. Then they said an actual vote never occurred. Now there really was a vote but it was actually 11-3? I wonder what the results of the vote will be in next week’s reporting.