BroadneckBlue21

August 31st, 2020 at 3:56 PM ^

Not so hard to extrapolate what was known from April, maybe even March: no matter how much athletes were protected during summer that protection is gone once they attend class with the rest of the student body. 

That 10% of the Iowa team has the virus after a week of class...not surprising, and the reason why fall football is a risk. Now they have 10 potential spreaders to other players on the team—and we know positive result may take days to get /be known due to incubation period and asymptomatic percentages.

Its a huge game of playing blindfolded whack a mole. 

Carpetbagger

September 1st, 2020 at 11:43 AM ^

You do know kids right?

Let me tell you the story of one of my wife's co-workers college kids. 4 kids live in an apartment off-campus. 2 of them tested positive for the Covid as part of the return to school testing. All 4 are now quarantined etc etc.

Her coworker was of course worried when she heard about this, as even though her son didn't test positive, he lives with them, so he will be positive at some point. When she asked him what he was going to do he said "Drink beer and study, what else is there to do locked in an apartment with 3 other dudes for 2 weeks?"

bacon1431

August 31st, 2020 at 4:37 PM ^

It would be a big factor. Players interact with each other every day the week. If someone on your team has the virus and it’s not detected, they are more likely to spread it to each other in a contact sport that you practice every day vs a class where there is potential to social distance and you only have that class 2-3 days a week. 

bacon1431

August 31st, 2020 at 5:29 PM ^

It’s obviously a factor in that players are most certainly spreading it to each other. We’ve seen multiple instances of teams shutting down practice because multiple players are testing positive. They are most likely getting it from each other rather than multiple players getting it from multiple different sources. 

BlueWolverine02

August 31st, 2020 at 6:03 PM ^

It's a surprise that campuses with multiple (sometimes hundreds or even thousand) cases has football players with multiple cases?  Are we not seeing plenty of spread across campus from non football players?  Do we have any evidence that football players are getting it from practice and not the campus that they all are part of?  If we end up with 100% exposure on campus, will it even matter where the exposure came from?

Sure in theory I understand why it could be more likely to contract it from a football atmosphere. We aren't dealing in theory here though, so I don't think it makes a bit of difference.  Either way, I expect football players to be exposed to covid, whether it's through campus or through practice.

bacon1431

August 31st, 2020 at 7:20 PM ^

Is it more likely that a majority of football players got it from each other or elsewhere on campus? A single positive test in a short period of time suggests that a player got it from elsewhere and they were able to isolate before spreading it to teammates. Multiple positives tests on a team suggest one of them probably got it elsewhere and spread it to others on the team. This is just basic logic.

BlueWolverine02

August 31st, 2020 at 10:54 PM ^

Seriously?  That's your answer?  So if you have a campus with 1000 cases, and a football team with 10 cases, you find it logical that they obviously got it from each other?  Now what if that campus has 10,000 cases?  Being obtuse has nothing to do with it.  My whole argument is that if we keep campuses open, we are going to have 10,000 cases on each campus and at that point, getting it from a fellow football player won't be so logical.  It's literally going to be everywhere on these campuses.

oriental andrew

August 31st, 2020 at 6:03 PM ^

Football is not a significant factor in spreading it to the rest of campus, but you're completely overlooking the fact that, even with the more stringent measures being taken for football players and (presumably) other athletes, they can still get COVID-19 and potentially spread it to the rest of the team. 

And yes, the broader campus community is likely the source of the outbreak among the football players, but internal transmission among the team is still a thing to be concerned about. 

We've already discussed ad nauseum that it's unrealistic to keep the college players in a true bubble. 

MaizeBlueA2

September 1st, 2020 at 5:54 AM ^

Are they sitting in classrooms full of kids though? Most universities have figured out ways to social distance in classes...whether that's use a larger room, offer more classes or split the class 1/2 remote, 1/2 in person and rotate.

Not that any of it helps, but that's different than lining up directly across from a guy breathing in your face, locker rooms, etc.

Blue Vet

August 31st, 2020 at 4:02 PM ^

Transparency is a great virtue in public decision making but it sounds mostly as if people are upset by this decision itself, not by details of how it was reached.

For instance, of the transparency being sought, there was very little of it when Penn State, Nebraska, Rutgers, and Maryland were added to the Big Ten.

MGoStretch

August 31st, 2020 at 3:53 PM ^

On a positive note, the fewer sessions they have, the fewer opportunities for their coaches to say racist stuff. So they've got that going for them, which is nice.

robpollard

August 31st, 2020 at 4:02 PM ^

Thankfully, the country has made some progress over the past 2-3 weeks (hopefully the in-person college openings won't reverse it), but Iowa is on its way to being the worst in the country, taking the place of Florida / Georgia / Texas.

https://cbs2iowa.com/news/local/gov-reynolds-announces-guidance-of-when-schools-can-move-online-because-of-coronavirus

Their governor issued an insane "return to school" plan that said unless the positivity rate was above 15%, school districts couldn't go solely online. Even at that level, Iowa said that the virus was "Substantial controlled"

Considering the WHO recommends a level of < 5% before considering re-opening schools, and Harvard recommends < 3%, forcing schools to be open when COVID is wide-spread in the community guarantees there will be huge outbreaks, so no surprise there is one at U Iowa, where about 1/3 of the classes are face-to-face.

robpollard

August 31st, 2020 at 8:39 PM ^

Beyond the poor decisions around schools and universities I mentioned, remeber the Sturgis Biker Rally in SD in early August w thousands of people jammed into a tiny town?

Everyone (except for the South Dakota Governor and the band Smash Mouth) predicted it would lead to outbreaks in surrounding states, and guess what? They were right!

DJMich23

August 31st, 2020 at 6:06 PM ^

Was just about to say this. I live here and the past week has literally been the worst since this pandemic started. As many as 2,500+ in a single day. Considering Iowa's population, this is a disaster. Iowa is top two in the U.S in cases per capata and we still don't have a mask mandate. Kim Reynolds (IA governor) has failed from the very beginning with her lax conditions and it's costing us.

oriental andrew

August 31st, 2020 at 6:09 PM ^

I don't know the IA governor or his stances on things, but I'm guessing he's all in the "it's basically the flu" and "herd immunity" bandwagons. 

In any case, one of the thresholds for going to completely online* learning is if 10% of the students are absent. Given how quickly things escalated in certain GA schools (including multiple high schools in Cherokee County, about 40 minutes north of Atlanta), I wouldn't be surprised if many of these schools shut it down within a week or two. 

*online learning can only be temporary and only with approval from both the DOE and DPH. Ridiculous. 

robpollard

August 31st, 2020 at 6:28 PM ^

Oh, it's going great.

https://www.iowapublicradio.org/education/2020-08-28/as-school-starts-districts-face-disruptions-from-covid-19
 

"An elementary school in the Eddyville-Blakesburg-Fremont district was closed Wednesday after several cases were confirmed among the staff."

"On Monday, Indianola schools announced the whole sixth grade was going online because a teacher tested positive and other teachers were in close contact."

"Ankeny school district reported seven students and one staff member have tested positive. Thirty-nine more people are in isolation for close contact with the virus."

And while the biggest school districts (e.g., Iowa City) have not started yet, we have this genius move: "Other districts are moving ahead with their back-to-school plans, even in Plymouth County, which had the highest infection rate in the state."

uofmchris1

August 31st, 2020 at 4:26 PM ^

Confused here...

B1G cancels fall season due to health and safety concerns but is allowing teams to continue workouts and practices?!

 

jmblue

August 31st, 2020 at 4:29 PM ^

A lot of teams will have this.  The question is what they do in response.  Michigan football apparently had 11 positive tests (out of 893) over the summer but none in August, which suggests that guys started taking protective measures more seriously as time went on.    

Everyone was down on MLB when they had the St. Louis and Miami outbreaks, but they seem to have righted the ship.  All 30 teams are moving along with their season now.

Iowa suspending workouts for a few days is an appropriate move.  We'll see what comes of it.