Snook: OSU, N, Iowa, PSU trying to convince Wisc, Mich to do 10-game fall season
Jeff Snook, a kind of John U. Bacon of OSU football, has posted on Facebook that OSU, with the help of three other schools, is trying to organize a 6-team, 10-game season among B1G schools. OSU, Nebraska, Iowa, and Penn State are on board with the proposal, and the goal is to convince Wisconsin and Michigan to sign on. Manuel, Harbaugh, and several large Michigan donors support the plan, but Schlissel is opposed:
Athletic Director Gene Smith, with the full support of school president-elect Kristina Johnson, has been working behind the scenes for the past six days to organize fellow Big Ten conference athletic directors in convincing at least five other university presidents to move forward with a 10-game season to be played among six teams, a source familiar with the movement told me today.
In this proposed format, each team would play the other five Big Ten teams who are participating twice -- once at home and once on the road, beginning on either Sept. 26 or Oct. 3. The season would conclude by mid-December and there would no Big Ten title game in Indianapolis.
As of Tuesday night, the source claimed that Penn State President Eric Barron, Nebraska President Walter “Ted” Carter and Iowa President Bruce Harreld are on board with the new plan. The group hopes to convince two other universities, notably the University of Wisconsin and the University of Michigan, to join them.
“They really need to flip Wisconsin and Michigan to get to six schools and make this thing work,” the source said. “And they have only so much time to do it. They need to make progress and get it done in the next seven to 10 days.”
Wisconsin Athletic Director Barry Alvarez, who coached the Badgers from 1990-2005, is a strong advocate for the plan but has yet to convince UW President Drew Peterson, the source said. Michigan Athletic Director Warde Manuel, a former Wolverine player under Bo Schembechler, and coach Jim Harbaugh also want to compete this fall season, but school president Mark Schlissel has so far opposed their efforts. Schlissel, who has a medical degree, spoke in support of “player safety” after the Big Ten’s announcement to cancel last week.
“This thing probably won’t go anywhere unless certain Big Ten presidents – like those at Michigan and Wisconsin – feel the pressure from their alumni, fans and especially their major donors,” the source said. “I understand that several seven- and eight-figure donors at Michigan are very unhappy with the Big Ten’s decision and are putting pressure on their president to change his mind. And they may be threatening to withhold their money.
“If they can get six schools to participate, the remaining Big Ten schools then have the choice to either join them or opt out of the season.”
More in the full article on Facebook.
August 19th, 2020 at 7:00 AM ^
Have to justify those salaries somehow...
Also, not surprised to see an OSU beat journalist minimizing Schlissel's credentials. A physical therapist and an immunologist both have "medical degrees" - that does not mean both are equally qualified to render decisions on a virulent respiratory pandemic.
August 19th, 2020 at 7:25 AM ^
Schlissel didn't exactly go to backwater schools, either. Princeton undergrad and Hopkins for MD and PhD. (Side note: That should thrill the jackass poster who often describes himself as "Hopkins grad.")
Yes, some of the equivalency judgments are hilarious. No disrespect to the physician extenders out there, but you'd generally be nuts to compare them straight up to physicians.
August 19th, 2020 at 8:43 AM ^
Regardless of where you stand, they didn't give supported data to say why they cancelled the season after just releasing a 10 game schedule. The Conference Commissioner had no answers for direct questions. Vague words of player safety does not answer those questions.
Player safety and moving the season to the spring means athletes will play a 10 game spring schedule and 12 game fall schedule with the possibility of a conference championship game, bowl game or 2 games in the cfp. So half the athletes would play at least a 23 game 2021 schedule others 14 or 15. All would play at least a 22 game schedule.
Our athletes that go on to the NFL and would play the spring 10 game schedule would follow that up with a 20 nfl schedule including preseason (though the 4 game preseason schedule might be reduced, not sure) And the possibility of playoffs afterward. So in a calendar year that is 30 games. Again, how is that remotely safe for Big10 and Pac12 football players?
August 19th, 2020 at 11:57 AM ^
DoctorDetroit is highly offended, Good Sir!
August 19th, 2020 at 7:04 PM ^
Jeff Snook wishes he was thought of like JUB!
August 19th, 2020 at 8:41 AM ^
Sir Yacht must agree or it didn't happen.
August 19th, 2020 at 9:14 AM ^
I've said this before, but I'll say it again. Some of you give too much weight to those with medical degrees. The best way to get 10 different opinions on one case is to get 9 doctors in a room and ask their opinions.
They know more than we do, this is true, but that is all.
August 19th, 2020 at 9:27 AM ^
This is true. And also, there are differing takes on the evidence. Take, for example, the issue of myocarditis. The study on myocarditis that has freaked out a number of college leaders turns out to be have been less compelling, or at the very least, more controversial, upon further inspection.
August 19th, 2020 at 12:03 PM ^
who says the virus can't bring people together? i am with CommieFBall!
August 19th, 2020 at 12:10 PM ^
That would only be true if B1G was basing this decision just on that single study. But they also have the data from young athletes coming down with myocarditis, which is what put them to cancel the season.
August 19th, 2020 at 12:39 PM ^
It’s not a matter of having different opinions. We leave medical decisions to medical experts. And medical experts are basically in agreement about what to do in this pandemic. Any disagreements are mild. We don’t know what SEC experts think because they’re not saying anything or showing data. The consensus among experts is clear. Social distance. No contact sports outside of bubbles . Period.
August 19th, 2020 at 3:41 PM ^
And medical experts are basically in agreement about what to do in this pandemic. Any disagreements are mild.
I think you'd be surprised about that.
August 19th, 2020 at 11:22 PM ^
You're always going to be able to find extremes.
August 19th, 2020 at 12:47 PM ^
That study was one of a couple that showed myocarditis with people affected by COVID-19. Many doctors have reported seeing similar heart issues with patients recovering from the disease. This narrative that all of these leagues relied on this single report feels manufactured, perhaps in part because the leagues didn't explicitly divulge all their evidence, but also because a couple of individuals spoke out against the Germany report around the same time the decisions were made and so there was some melding of two different issues.
August 19th, 2020 at 12:52 PM ^
It’s not a matter of having different opinions. We leave medical decisions to medical experts. And medical experts are basically in agreement about what to do in this pandemic. Any disagreements are mild. We don’t know what SEC experts think because they’re not saying anything or showing data. The consensus among experts is clear. Social distance. No contact sports outside of bubbles . Period.
August 19th, 2020 at 10:07 AM ^
What is better proxy for medical expertise than a medical doctorate? Of course if you collect a number of folks of at least moderate intelligence in a room and ask them to solve an extremely complex problem, you will get differing opinions. Your post is an excellent demonstration of the degradation of expertise and that concept is an enormous threat to our society. Everyone is certainly entitled to their opinions, but not every opinion is equally valuable to society.
Your last paragraph is *chef's kiss* great. It essentially says, "so what if someone went to college for nearly a decade, then did a bunch of additional training, and know 1000x more than the average person about medicine and physiology. Who cares if they know more than we do? My opinions matter too".
August 19th, 2020 at 10:16 AM ^
I've worked with Doctors in all kinds of specialties for a couple decades in Hospitals. I have immense respect for them, their intellect and the dedication it takes to get to where they are. They are smart people. They are also just as egotistical as you expect from the stereotype. Sometimes that ego is even earned by their ability.
I've also watched doctors argue to within inches of violence over a simple case of COPD.
All I'm saying is, just because one doctor has an opinion, it doesn't invalidate all other opinions.
August 19th, 2020 at 10:27 AM ^
That's a fair point that a single doctor's opinion doesn't invalidate all other opinions. But on the whole, society needs the expertise that doctors collectively posses (same with engineers, astronauts, scientists, etc...) and even a wrong doctor doesn't invalidate the entirety of the profession. If you think every doctor you encounter is "just as egotistical as you expect from the stereotype", that honestly sounds like it might be a you issue and not a them issue. But what do I know, I'm not a psychiatrist, just an egotistical pediatric oncologist ;)
August 19th, 2020 at 10:49 AM ^
Fair point, not all doctors I dealt with were. The more specialized the more egotistical I found. Although you have to admit, the profession is run through with them. If you don't see that, well, I have news for you that you aren't going to like Doc! (I've never worked with a Pediatric Oncologist, but all the Oncologists, Rad and Med, I've worked with have been good character people, although not always workers.)
It's really fine though. As a character flaw I'd much rather have a competent egotistical doctor than an incompetent humble doctor any day.
August 19th, 2020 at 11:18 AM ^
The Jack Welsh view of business management includes the idea that in any profession with a large enough workforce:
- 10% are going to be exceptional and leaders
- 75% are going to be really good employees they just don’t have that extra special capability
- 15% should not be in that field and need to move on or be processed out
In 20+ years dealing with all types of businesses, I believe this is mostly accurate. This also is top of mind every time I visit a dentist, doctor, get on an airplane, almost everything. My first thought is, are you in the 15% or part of the 85%. When I see a 15%er I run the other way.
August 19th, 2020 at 2:52 PM ^
Winning is a must read.
August 19th, 2020 at 10:43 AM ^
I've said this before, but I'll say it again. Some of you give too much weight to those with medical degrees. The best way to get 10 different opinions on one case is to get 9 doctors in a room and ask their opinions.
Who needs doctors when we have Google?!? This is of course true and no different in exercise science. Ask 10 different people a question about exercise and you'll get quite a few different responses. The correct answer is it almost always depends. It depends on the individual, the circumstances, their experience level, any preexisting conditions, etc etc etc. The key is to not make blanket statements that will most certainly be incorrect in a number of possible scenarios, cater your advice to your specific population, and use evidence based recommendations when available. But, that doesn't mean that the personal trainer at Planet Fitness that did a weekend certification course has the same knowledge as I do who has a master's degree in exercise science, has worked for multiple college strength & conditioning programs, and who has 20 years of training experience. There are levels of expertise to this stuff. Just because you train newbie teenager that has little danger of hurting themselves and will respond to almost anything doesn't mean you can take a college athlete to the next level or can train someone with a serious injury without hurting them worse.
August 19th, 2020 at 4:55 PM ^
Yeah and I think we need to think about what questions we are asking doctors to solve. We should be asking them of the threat of covid to society if they have expertise in respiratory and cardiovascular and even renal systems (seems like covid causes a variety of organ issues for some people).
But we don't have to rely 100% on their opinions on what to do in a pandemic regarding that research. Some may want to stop the season, no matter the loss in revenue. Some may want to play the season, no matter the risk to others. And most of us are somewhere in between.
But I also do not like the exaggerated statement that if you get 9 doctors in a room that you will get 10 opinions. Most of the facts would be the same. It is the theories on a disease (if it is not yet diagnosed), and the treatment regimens which may differ a bit based a lot on past cases seen (aka experience). Instead of belittling doctors in total, I think you add up their experiences instead, sort them out, and have a better aggregated, thoughtful solution.
Yes, they can have egos...anyone with that much education can have one. Plus in society, we are taught to trust doctors 110%. If you pump up doctors forever as the end-all solution provider, they will get biased that their opinions really are the best. Doctors have the highest liability insurance so PAs, nurses, etc, all have to defer to them. And pharmaceuticals provide free samples, hospital admins make more $$ off certain procedures and doctors know that, plus doctors are driving toward their own salaries, etc etc. It all becomes part of bias. But most are amazing, and I'd rather have 9 doctors in a room than one doctor to aggregate experiences.
So I'm hoping the individual who said they've said it before and will say it again that 9 doctors in a room creates 10 opinions, actually decides not to keep saying that again.
August 19th, 2020 at 11:23 AM ^
So the next time you need surgery you'll just do it on yourself since doctors only know more than you do?
August 19th, 2020 at 6:03 PM ^
These liberal bootlickers only care about the medical credentials that agree with their position.
August 19th, 2020 at 10:23 AM ^
Why are they including Northern Iowa? :)
August 19th, 2020 at 7:02 AM ^
I mean, I'm not surprised that certain schools including their presidents want to play, and certain others don't
I have a hard time seeing the needle moving on this, especially given that every day we're hearing of another school or three going to online classes only, stopping football practice due to a covid outbreak/cluster, etc
August 19th, 2020 at 7:07 AM ^
Well, good luck to them. I doubt it will happen, but good luck.
August 19th, 2020 at 7:15 AM ^
Is it happening? Yes. Will Schlissel let this happen? Nope.
August 19th, 2020 at 7:17 AM ^
For Christ sake. We never learn in this country. This virus has the potential to rage on for a long time because people are so damn selfish.
August 19th, 2020 at 9:23 AM ^
I guess my response is; what's your point?
B1G has students on campus
20 hour football practice
Kids in dorms
intramural sports
testing like crazy
The only reason not to play is because you think they could get it during the game!
Are you saying we should lock down 100%. Newsflash it's not going to happen corona bro.
August 19th, 2020 at 9:35 AM ^
Here comes the neg train because you have a different opinion on this blog. I’m sure WD will comment here in a little bit telling you how wrong you are.
August 19th, 2020 at 6:27 PM ^
This. This site is an absolute joke. Might as well go ahead and rename it, MSNBCGoBlog.
August 19th, 2020 at 9:47 AM ^
You forgot about having those kids travel to multiple locations, often several states away and some having quarantine restrictions, and interacting with many other students (and various people encountered during travel, such as other hotel guests), none of whom are under the same supervision wrt pandemic restrictions.
If the team was just staying home, practicing and scrimmaging only each other, you would have a stronger argument. As we have seen just in the last 1+ week, individual schools are having trouble with viral outbreaks on their own campuses (including on their FB teams)... let alone adding the complication of interacting with other campus populations.
August 19th, 2020 at 12:14 PM ^
You forgot about having those kids travel to multiple locations, often several states away and some having quarantine restrictions, and interacting with many other students (and various people encountered during travel, such as other hotel guests), none of whom are under the same supervision wrt pandemic restrictions.
Let's assume this will happen with the football team. (I'd dispute that there would be much interaction)
How is that different than the normal life of a college student who travels to and from campus from their home state?
August 19th, 2020 at 1:07 PM ^
Because you're asking the players to do it on an almost weekly basis for 3 months. That includes away games and, yes, home games where the players are in direct contact with another out-of-state team, etc.
Your average "college student who travels to and from campus from their home state" will do that 2 or 3 times max in the typical school year. And many won't leave the state at all until academic year lets out.
August 19th, 2020 at 2:11 PM ^
Well I'm sure you're happy they aren't playing. I think it's unfortunate that they don't get to decide for themselves.
August 19th, 2020 at 1:46 PM ^
May want to keep up with the daily scorecard
Notre Dame online first two weeks
MSU online fall semester
NC online fall semester
They're closing like hot cakes and will continue
August 19th, 2020 at 10:58 AM ^
Even with everything that is going on with schools going online, they still think it's a good idea to play football
August 19th, 2020 at 3:04 PM ^
If all classes are online, it helps keep football players away from other students. So then doesn't it make it easier to play football?
August 19th, 2020 at 7:18 AM ^
I love Michigan Football and really wish there was a way to have a fall season, but in the end this would prove to be just another exercise in futility.
August 19th, 2020 at 11:04 AM ^
The B1G made the correct decision initially and now seems to be actually getting influenced by the dumbasses who got us in this predicament in the first place. Even with multiple large schools having outbreaks and multiple schools making the decision to go online, people have still convinced themselves playing football is a good idea. Somehow our country has gotten under the control of vocal dumb minority of people and we're going to pay the price. This country is truly becoming an idiocracy
August 19th, 2020 at 11:23 AM ^
I’m honestly becoming curious what it’s going to take for those people to open their eyes and just see how bad of an idea this all is...
How many players or coaches are going to have to get this and get really sick or die? What’s the number there? Is it going to take a star player dying? Is it going to have to be a player on the team they root for?
At what point is enough going to be enough and we just try again next year?
August 19th, 2020 at 12:21 PM ^
Don't worry they'll just bring up how players die in car accidents all the time which makes a few players dying from covid a price that's worth paying
August 19th, 2020 at 12:54 PM ^
Sadly, there are a lot of people who think nothing is more important than football.
August 19th, 2020 at 12:53 PM ^
Do you really think student athletes will be immune to COVID by not playing football. I doubt they are going to stay in their parents home for the next year. They will go out with their friends, catch and spread the virus as much or to a greater extent.
August 19th, 2020 at 1:45 PM ^
No but if they're not playing football, they're not going to practice everyday and coming into close contact with 100+ other heavily-breathing students/teammates as well as coaches and other adults who may be significantly more at risk. I'm not that worried about the players catching it (although the long-term repercussions look pretty scary), but the potential to spread the virus is the main issue.
But, how about this: let's not do anything that might perpetuate the spread of this thing at this point.
August 20th, 2020 at 8:33 AM ^
If you could point out to me where I (or anyone) said it makes players immune, that would be helpful and maybe I could address your concerns.
What IS being said, is that schools shouldn’t be sending student athletes to meet up with 100 new people every week and then coming back to their respective campuses.
Then you go on to list a host of issues that are outside of the school’s control. Schools have no say in whether students go to parties, hang out with friends or anything. But they DO have a say in whether the football team is going to be playing. The University has a responsibility to control the elements they can control. It’s up to the students to follow the guidelines. And honestly, if more people HAD been following the guideline, we would likely have college football this year. But too many people wanted to huff and puff and stomp their feet and cry about “muh freedumbs” and it kept this virus going strong in this country.
August 19th, 2020 at 12:53 PM ^
Do you really think student athletes will be immune to COVID by not playing football. I doubt they are going to stay in their parents home for the next year. They will go out with their friends, catch and spread the virus as much or to a greater extent.
August 19th, 2020 at 3:23 PM ^
Even with multiple large schools having outbreaks and multiple schools making the decision to go online, people have still convinced themselves playing football is a good idea. Somehow our country has gotten under the control of vocal dumb minority of people and we're going to pay the price.
So you're counting Harbaugh, Ward, and the players as part of the "vocal dumb minority", right?
The echo chamber/group think on these boards is simply astounding sometimes. Your own AD, coach, and players have and are continuing to lobby to play, yet you talk about "people" with a different opinion than yours as if they are stupid, naive children.