Harvard sucks but they're going to save more lives than anybody else by the time this ends.
They killed off the NC$$ death wish last year when they shut down athletics, starting the dominos that ended with the entire NC$$ being forced to do the right thing.
Welp, they just went to all online for 20-21. Presumably this means no athletics, which ought to shut down 20-21.
tl; dr: F-ck Harvard except this once. Good for them.
Quote from: TrotskyHarvard sucks but they're going to save more lives than anybody else by the time this ends.
They killed off the NC$$ death wish last year when they shut down athletics, starting the dominos that ended with then entire NC$$ being forced to do the right thing.
Welp, they just went to all online for 20-21. Presumably this means no athletics, which ought to shut down 20-21.
tl; dr: F-ck Harvard except this once. Good for them.
Meanwhile, my school (I attend, wife teaches) is back to normal in the fall. Good for us.
Quote from: DafatoneMeanwhile, my school (I attend, wife teaches) is back to normal in the fall. Good for us.
I'm sorry for your loss, in advance.
What's 40% of Harvard's undergrad enrollment? So they'll have a couple thousand students on campus?
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: DafatoneMeanwhile, my school (I attend, wife teaches) is back to normal in the fall. Good for us.
I'm sorry for your loss, in advance.
She gets a face shield. I get to see how much weight I can throw around in law school and insist on being more online because I have a clerkship lined up after next year.
I suppose we'll see if/when they pull the plug after covid starts spreading. I've yet to see a single mask in northwest Iowa.
These kids are at zero risk from this virus. Why are we trying to ruin their lives exactly?
Quote from: underskillThese kids are at zero risk from this virus.
Citation?
Look at any chart showing death by age range? Unless Cuomo is running the campus and stuffing them in nursing homes that is.
Quote from: underskillLook at any chart showing death by age range? Unless Cuomo is running the campus and stuffing them in nursing homes that is.
Opinions vary (https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/06/covid-19-cases-among-us-young-adults-spike). Yours doesn't seem to carry much weight outside of talk radio.
Quote from: underskillThese kids are at zero risk from this virus. Why are we trying to ruin their lives exactly?
There's evidence that mild and even asymptomatic cases can result in lasting lung and organ damage.
Faculty and staff aren't young. If you think people 25 and under are at zero risk, can you guarantee that all faculty and staff will be 25 and under?
How the hell would we keep Schafer safe?
Case counts are irrelevant if it doesn't lead to hospitalizations. Better to have these kids with each other on campus then staying w their older parents and family members.
Quote from: underskillCase counts are irrelevant if it doesn't lead to hospitalizations. Better to have these kids with each other on campus then staying w their older parents and family members.
How do you figure they're irrelevant?
And more importantly, faculty and staff are older and exposed, constantly, to undergrads.
Quote from: DafatoneQuote from: underskillThese kids are at zero risk from this virus. Why are we trying to ruin their lives exactly?
There's evidence that mild and even asymptomatic cases can result in lasting lung and organ damage.
Faculty and staff aren't young. If you think people 25 and under are at zero risk, can you guarantee that all faculty and staff will be 25 and under?
How the hell would we keep Schafer safe?
We are dealing with ideology, not thinking. Let it be. #nopolitics
We don't need to discover who's a moron when all we care about is who hates Harvard sufficiently.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: DafatoneQuote from: underskillThese kids are at zero risk from this virus. Why are we trying to ruin their lives exactly?
There's evidence that mild and even asymptomatic cases can result in lasting lung and organ damage.
Faculty and staff aren't young. If you think people 25 and under are at zero risk, can you guarantee that all faculty and staff will be 25 and under?
How the hell would we keep Schafer safe?
We are dealing with ideology, not thinking. Let it be. #nopolitics
We don't need to discover who's a moron when all we care about is who hates Harvard sufficiently.
Is now the right time to admit I hate Dartmouth more than Harvard?
Quote from: DafatoneQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: DafatoneQuote from: underskillThese kids are at zero risk from this virus. Why are we trying to ruin their lives exactly?
There's evidence that mild and even asymptomatic cases can result in lasting lung and organ damage.
Faculty and staff aren't young. If you think people 25 and under are at zero risk, can you guarantee that all faculty and staff will be 25 and under?
How the hell would we keep Schafer safe?
We are dealing with ideology, not thinking. Let it be. #nopolitics
We don't need to discover who's a moron when all we care about is who hates Harvard sufficiently.
Is now the right time to admit I hate Dartmouth more than Harvard?
Dartmouth is all my fault. Cornell is something like 25-5-5 in Dartmouth games I have seen. I just stopped going.
Edit: 27-7-1.
Quote from: underskillThese kids are at zero risk from this virus. Why are we trying to ruin their lives exactly?
Please tell Juan Garcia's family that the kids are at "zero risk." (https://6abc.com/penn-state-covid-19-coronavirus-student-dies-juan-garcia/6295532/)
Quote from: TrotskyWe don't need to discover who's a moron...
I'm beginning to think we do. The morons are causing this country to destroy itself...and too many of us with it.
Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: TrotskyWe don't need to discover who's a moron...
I'm beginning to think we do. The morons are causing this country to destroy itself...and too many of us with it.
+infinity
I tried inserting the symbol for infinity (two versions on my Mac, and I'm too lazy to look up the codes) but got a Phorum error.
Maybe I need to learn more about the Emancipation Proclamation Act (https://youtu.be/LLuESd7zidA) (just after 2:00, a great example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect#:~:text=As%20described%20by%20social%20psychologists,whereas%20the%20miscalibration%20of%20the)). Natural selection can't act fast enough.
Maybe I'm just missing it, but I haven't seen anything in this decision that relates to athletics. It wouldn't be all that surprising if a disproportionate percentage of the "40%" of on-campus students happened to be athletes. That said, the Ivy League is supposed to be making some sort of announcement on July 8th.
Quote from: Give My RegardsMaybe I'm just missing it, but I haven't seen anything in this decision that relates to athletics. It wouldn't be all that surprising if a disproportionate percentage of the "40%" of on-campus students happened to be athletes. That said, the Ivy League is supposed to be making some sort of announcement on July 8th.
They haven't said anything about athletes. But other than cash I can't imagine even a desperately cynical rationale for running athletics. It's a fucking extracurricular activity. It would be like Risley holding SCA during the plague. (Actually that would be Super Hard Core!)
With education, at least involving hands-on stuff like science labs, maybe there is at least a looooooooooooooong stretch of a reason for taking the risk (spoiler: there isn't). But for
sports? FFS.
maybe you need to ask the kids in the sports how they feel about it. i know coaches and players want to play for the most part.
Quote from: upprdeckmaybe you need to ask the kids in the sports how they feel about it. i know coaches and players want to play for the most part.
Sign of apocalypse, I actually agree with upprdeck for once.
To call sports an extra-curricular activity is far too simplistic. We all know that there are only a small percentage of Ivy athletes that end up able to go pro in their chosen sport. But for those who have even an outside chance of going pro (or who have thoughts of becoming coaches after graduation) it's not an extrea-curricular- it's vocational training.
Quote from: upprdeckmaybe you need to ask the kids in the sports how they feel about it. i know coaches and players want to play for the most part.
Why would anybody listen to doctors and public policy experts when we can ask a bunch of 22-year olds?
Quote from: abmarksQuote from: upprdeckmaybe you need to ask the kids in the sports how they feel about it. i know coaches and players want to play for the most part.
Sign of apocalypse, I actually agree with upprdeck for once.
To call sports an extra-curricular activity is far too simplistic. We all know that there are only a small percentage of Ivy athletes that end up able to go pro in their chosen sport. But for those who have even an outside chance of going pro (or who have thoughts of becoming coaches after graduation) it's not an extrea-curricular- it's vocational training.
Of course! It's much more important that kids get to play a game than have others live. Impeccable logic.:-|
There's just no safe way to return to campus, period.
Once you accept that, how do you handle sports? You could have athletes only return, but that seems unlikely, difficult, and still not terribly safe.
I think we have some mixed up perspectives on this.
If the campus is safe enough for kids to be on campus then is it safe enough for kids to play sports.
If the kids are being tested as part of the sport then them playing is not an issue of safety, they most likely will not being sick from playing the sport , but thats a function of how much testing they get.. if they are getting tested daily which may well be what happens then its pretty safe.
The issue will be how safe the kids are around each other outside the practice arena and with other students on campus and that doesnt really change if they are playing or just going to school.
In the case of hockey many of the kids have been around each other as they live together.
Look at the pro sports, in almost every case so far the people getting sick are getting outside of the sports arena and there has been very little spread inside.
But given all that I dont think the ivies are playing this fall.
Quote from: DafatoneThere's just no safe way to return to campus, period.
Once you accept that, how do you handle sports? You could have athletes only return, but that seems unlikely, difficult, and still not terribly safe.
I think the NCAA has already said there will be no games if there are no students on campus.
Quote from: upprdeckI think we have some mixed up perspectives on this.
If the campus is safe enough for kids to be on campus then is it safe enough for kids to play sports.
There is
one mixed up perspective on this.
Perhaps you fondly remember the days of crossing the quad struggling through body checks while throwing the Archaeology students into the sundial and digging for the puck in the corners with the Linguistics majors.
You can possibly social distance as a student. You cannot in a contact sport.
And as long as there are asymptomatic carriers you cannot stop people in close proximity from becoming little vector creches.
Not to mention road trips, hotel stays, group meals, and all the other communal stuff athletes do.
And once you create wildfire infections on teams the effects spread out so even if young healthy people were not seriously affected (which they are) they will eventually infect others who are high morbidity.
It's a
game. It isn't important. Ban it as a hazard until this is over.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: upprdeckI think we have some mixed up perspectives on this.
If the campus is safe enough for kids to be on campus then is it safe enough for kids to play sports.
There is one mixed up perspective on this.
Perhaps you fondly remember the days of crossing the quad struggling through body checks while throwing the Archaeology students into the sundial and digging for the puck in the corners with the Linguistics majors.
You can possibly social distance as a student. You cannot in a contact sport.
And as long as there are asymptomatic carriers you cannot stop people in close proximity from becoming little vector creches.
Not to mention road trips, hotel stays, group meals, and all the other communal stuff athletes do.
And once you create wildfire infections on teams the effects spread out so even if young healthy people were not seriously affected (which they are) they will eventually infect others who are high morbidity.
It's a game. It isn't important. Ban it as a hazard until this is over.
The kids and their parties, sex, and sex parties will be more of a threat than hockey. The idea that 18-22 year olds, let alone everyone else, will stay six feet apart at all times is ridiculous.
But that just means don't return to campus.
My son is going to be a freshman at Colgate, and they are planning on having all students back. All students will need a test (with proof of negative result) taken within 10 days prior to arrival; students will then be tested within 2 days of arrival, and then again within 10 more days. Students testing positive without symptoms will be quarantined, and Colgate has acquired a local inn that will be used for quarantine purposes.
All students and other members of the Colgate community will need to sign a pledge to adhere to the rules (social distancing, mask wearing, etc.), with supposed severe consequences for violation of the rules, including being sent home. Like other schools planning on-campus activities this fall, there will be a mix of in-person and online classes, and there will be no fall break, no homecoming, no parents' weekend, and everyone goes home Thanksgiving to finish the semester.
The Patriot League has yet to announce how they'll be handling sports, but it's hard to see how they can do fall sports since off campus travel is supposed to be strictly limited. My son is hoping to play club soccer, but I'm guessing intramurals may be the only possible option.
Like anyone I have my doubts that the kids will truly follow the rules. But I'm more optimistic that a school the size of Colgate can pull off something resembling the semblance of an on-campus experience with limited outbreaks than a larger place like Cornell, especially given the existence of another fairly large school just down the road and a larger surrounding community (although thankfully Tomkins County has had very few cases).
While my son of course can stay home and we made clear he can choose that option, at this point he's hoping to head to Hamilton for the fall. While certainly I have my concerns, he's a healthy and fit kid with no underlying conditions, and while we know there is some risk the statistics tell us that his risk of getting severely ill from the virus as a healthy 18-year old is quite low. Fingers are crossed.
Reports are no Ivy sports until at least 1/1/21.
Quote from: Chris '03Reports are no Ivy sports until at least 1/1/21.
It's a start, let's make it 9/1/21.
What was the source?
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: Chris '03Reports are no Ivy sports until at least 1/1/21.
It's a start, let's make it 9/1/21.
What was the source?
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/08/sports/ncaafootball/ivy-league-fall-sports-football-coronavirus.html
https://www.si.com/college/2020/07/08/ivy-league-postpone-fall-sports-hopeful-football-spring
Quote from: Give My RegardsMaybe I'm just missing it, but I haven't seen anything in this decision that relates to athletics. It wouldn't be all that surprising if a disproportionate percentage of the "40%" of on-campus students happened to be athletes. That said, the Ivy League is supposed to be making some sort of announcement on July 8th.
For the most part you're right. But here's the thing: if this country could actually bring the novel coronavirus under control, we might be able to have hockey, lacrosse, basketball, etc. this coming academic year. This connection opens up the discussion to considering idiots who are preventing the US from bringing the virus under control.
Interesting nugget deep in the nytimes article:
"and in a sign of how impactful the loss of a season may be on a broad swath of athletes, the Ivy League said it would consider granting a fifth year of eligibility for athletes — something it stood steadfastly against when spring sports were canceled."
Quote from: abmarksInteresting nugget deep in the nytimes article:
"and in a sign of how impactful the loss of a season may be on a broad swath of athletes, the Ivy League said it would consider granting a fifth year of eligibility for athletes — something it stood steadfastly against when spring sports were canceled."
I think they should say you still only get 4 years but 20-21 isn't a year. That way they don't compromise their principle but nobody is affected.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: abmarksInteresting nugget deep in the nytimes article:
"and in a sign of how impactful the loss of a season may be on a broad swath of athletes, the Ivy League said it would consider granting a fifth year of eligibility for athletes — something it stood steadfastly against when spring sports were canceled."
I think they should say you still only get 4 years but 20-21 isn't a year. That way they don't compromise their principle but nobody is affected.
Semantics....
Ask yourself, "Which is more important, the amusement of thousands of hockey fans and the careers of thousands of politicians OR the lives and wellbeing of millions of Americans?" See how easy that was?
Quote from: TrotskyWe are dealing with ideology, not thinking.
And never the twain shall meet.
Quote from: TrotskyLet it be. #nopolitics
#Guffaw #IfOnly
Looks like a bit of offseason work is going on at Lynah: new boards.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CC3bSt9juKi/?igshid=1plqyty05pc8r
Quote from: WederLooks like a bit of offseason work is going on at Lynah: new boards.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CC3bSt9juKi/?igshid=1plqyty05pc8r
You say offseason, but what about in-season?::dribble::