@ RPI Fri 2/11/22

[Trotsky]

The terms "virtue signaling" and "SJW" mean you no longer need to take that person seriously.

Alternatively: you can engage with a person on the basis of their argument rather than dismissing what they have to say based on one term you think is vaguely problematic. Just because "virtue signaling" has become a buzzword for silly Ben Shapiro-types doesn't mean the term has no legitimate meaning. I think the term is applied correctly here.

What it means, even correctly, it itself idiotic.

[BearLover]

Lots of IMO baseless takes in this thread. This is not a "different team" from what we saw earlier this season. Cornell was in basically the same position in the PWR (somewhere in the 20s) for almost the entire first half. They tricked a lot of poll voters and forum posters by barely beating, or tying and then beating in OT, crap teams. And it certainly isn't true that the team "doesn't care"—they've played extremely hard the whole season. The effort level is no lower than that of any Cornell team I've watched in the past.

If you want to get angry at someone for not caring, I'd suggest you direct your anger at the Ivy League. They're the ones who decided to cancel last season while 51 other schools played because they thought obliterating all of their athletic teams was worth making it appear like they were doing something about COVID. And then the Ivy League waited until most of the upperclassmen transferred or went pro before announcing an extra year of eligibility. Meanwhile, all other schools granted a fifth year of eligibility anyway, despite playing last season. The result is that Cornell is regularly sending out lineups where nearly every player has one or two years of college hockey experience against teams filled with fourth and fifth year players. Obviously Cornell is going to be severely disadvantaged given those circumstances. And while some of Cornell's ECAC opponents are in a similar boat with respect to not playing last season, these opponents (especially those non-Ivies that allow for grad transfers) are still regularly putting out considerably older lineups than Cornell's.

I don't feel anger towards the Ivy League. I think it was the right call. It's unfortunate for the athletes. But the idea of a special status for athletics while everyone else is hunkered down is not appropriate for an environment where the primary goal is education.

But that's the thing—it was just for appearances, right? It didn't actually protect anybody. My issue is that the Ivy League decided that re-emphasizing its priorities—education over athletics—was more important than supporting its athletes. But just like the no grad transfer rule or the late start for hockey, canceling last season didn't accomplish anything positive whatsoever. It was just virtue signaling. At the cost of obliterating its athletic programs.

It wasn't "virtue signaling."  It was treating all students the same.  Rightly so.

Couldn't it just as easily be argued cancelling athletics amounted to treating athletes worse than members of other clubs that were allowed to hold events last year? More importantly, why does it matter? It's no skin off a non-athlete's back if the athletes get to play. I don't recall non-athletes at any college in America protesting their schools holding sports seasons. The only ones directly affected, the players and coaches, all wanted to play. I take Dafatone's point that there could be an indirect spread of COVID by, say, a hockey player contracting COVID in Providence and giving it to someone in Ithaca. But given the strict testing and distancing requirements in place last year, the likelihood of that feels kind of tenuous.

Anyway, it is what it is at this point.

[ugarte]

the best you can say is that, in retrospect, things were so bad anyway that ivy league sports wouldn't have made anything materially worse. i don't think that was as easy a call prospectively. it certainly wasn't virtue signaling, it was a risk assessment you disagree with. virtue signaling implies a lack of sincerity.

[Al DeFlorio]

Couldn't it just as easily be argued cancelling athletics amounted to treating athletes worse than members of other clubs that were allowed to hold events last year?

Cornell Glee Club?  Year and a half of no live performances.  Cornell Orchestra?  The 10/3/21 concert was the first in over a year.  Do your homework.

[underskill]

Two wrongs don't make a right.

[Dafatone]

Just gonna say, watching crowds in our games be largely masked makes me jealous. If crowds did that here (South Dakota), I'd be in more crowds.

[CU2007]

Just gonna say, watching crowds in our games be largely masked makes me jealous. If crowds did that here (South Dakota), I'd be in more crowds.

Serious question, not trying to be insulting or anything, what would make you comfortable being maskless in an arena again? Is it a certain (low) number of local cases? The CDC saying you don't need a mask in an arena?

[BearLover]

Couldn't it just as easily be argued cancelling athletics amounted to treating athletes worse than members of other clubs that were allowed to hold events last year?

Cornell Glee Club?  Year and a half of no live performances.  Cornell Orchestra?  The 10/3/21 concert was the first in over a year.  Do your homework.

Well, those restrictions were questionable also. I was thinking of things like debate club, which had a full year of virtual competitions.

[ugarte]

Couldn't it just as easily be argued cancelling athletics amounted to treating athletes worse than members of other clubs that were allowed to hold events last year?

Cornell Glee Club?  Year and a half of no live performances.  Cornell Orchestra?  The 10/3/21 concert was the first in over a year.  Do your homework.

Well, those restrictions were questionable also. I was thinking of things like debate club, which had a full year of virtual competitions.

see if you can piece together the clues, detective

[Jim Hyla]

Couldn't it just as easily be argued cancelling athletics amounted to treating athletes worse than members of other clubs that were allowed to hold events last year?

Cornell Glee Club?  Year and a half of no live performances.  Cornell Orchestra?  The 10/3/21 concert was the first in over a year.  Do your homework.

Well, those restrictions were questionable also. I was thinking of things like debate club, which had a full year of virtual competitions.

Well we could have had a full year of virtual hockey if we  wanted.

[Al DeFlorio]

Couldn't it just as easily be argued cancelling athletics amounted to treating athletes worse than members of other clubs that were allowed to hold events last year?

Cornell Glee Club?  Year and a half of no live performances.  Cornell Orchestra?  The 10/3/21 concert was the first in over a year.  Do your homework.

Well, those restrictions were questionable also. I was thinking of things like debate club, which had a full year of virtual competitions.

Sp you wanted "virtual" hockey?  Or "virtual" lacrosse?  Your comparison is laughable.

[BearLover]

Couldn't it just as easily be argued cancelling athletics amounted to treating athletes worse than members of other clubs that were allowed to hold events last year?

Cornell Glee Club?  Year and a half of no live performances.  Cornell Orchestra?  The 10/3/21 concert was the first in over a year.  Do your homework.

Well, those restrictions were questionable also. I was thinking of things like debate club, which had a full year of virtual competitions.

see if you can piece together the clues, detective

It's petty simple: you take reasonable precautions to hold the sport/activity as best you can. For example, 51/59 schools completed their hockey seasons last year by playing without fans or with limited fans. Very easy to do, very low risk. Pretty much a no-brainer if you care about your athletes.

[Trotsky]

Oh for fuck's sake just have an Ignore already.

[BearLover]

Couldn't it just as easily be argued cancelling athletics amounted to treating athletes worse than members of other clubs that were allowed to hold events last year?

Cornell Glee Club?  Year and a half of no live performances.  Cornell Orchestra?  The 10/3/21 concert was the first in over a year.  Do your homework.

Well, those restrictions were questionable also. I was thinking of things like debate club, which had a full year of virtual competitions.

Sp you wanted "virtual" hockey?  Or "virtual" lacrosse?  Your comparison is laughable.

Hockey with no fans and regular testing like all other leagues did in a safe and successful manner.

[Dafatone]

Couldn't it just as easily be argued cancelling athletics amounted to treating athletes worse than members of other clubs that were allowed to hold events last year?

Cornell Glee Club?  Year and a half of no live performances.  Cornell Orchestra?  The 10/3/21 concert was the first in over a year.  Do your homework.

Well, those restrictions were questionable also. I was thinking of things like debate club, which had a full year of virtual competitions.

Sp you wanted "virtual" hockey?  Or "virtual" lacrosse?  Your comparison is laughable.

Hockey with no fans and regular testing like all other leagues did in a safe and successful manner.

We really have no idea how safe much of anything, hockey included, was, other than that we can't definitively say that a whole team dropped dead of COVID or anything.

You could say that the amount of COVID spread by the Ivies playing college hockey would be relatively small compared to the country at large, but that's true for every single activity in avacuum, so following that logic, why cancel anything.