Just a reminder that survival rate isn't the number of people killed divided by the total population. It's the number of people killed divided by the number who got sick. And for MS, that's sitting at a 2.8% mortality rate right now, not counting any who are sick now and die.
What has changed since Friday afternoon at 5?
- Thread starter notoriousD_O_G
- Start date
College presidents are generally fundraisers first and much more friendly to conservative thought than many people here would suspect.
They’re also really pragmatic though and when words such as liability come up, they pay attention.
They’re also really pragmatic though and when words such as liability come up, they pay attention.
No **** idiot. Sorry to rain on your fear mongering party but the SURVIVAL (means you had it and lived) rate is 99.96%.
There are over 10,000 current college football players. Only 49 have “opted out” from playing.
If liability is the concern, and players have been given an opportunity to opt out and remain on scholarship, then how is this not “assumption of risk” and also, how could it be proven that the player caught the virus while playing football?
If we’re in a global pandemic, I would think proving the source of the infection would be problematic.
If liability is the concern, and players have been given an opportunity to opt out and remain on scholarship, then how is this not “assumption of risk” and also, how could it be proven that the player caught the virus while playing football?
If we’re in a global pandemic, I would think proving the source of the infection would be problematic.
I am all for playing, first let me state that. Serious question that comes to my mind, why is the B10 deciding anything for us? Or better yet, why in the 17 are we even worried what the B10 does? It would look possibly bad for the SEC to be the only one that plays, but I would think if the SEC played then so would the ACC.
We've been over this.
America: 161,352 deaths in 4,959,541 cases. That's a death rate of around 3.25%. Even if not a single additional person dies, the survival rate would be 96.75%.
There's a lot of error bars on that calculation, since there are certainly undiagnosed cases out there, although we'd need to be at around 300,000,000 cases for your 99.96% number to be correct. There are also undiagnosed deaths, and some of the people currently sick will die and increase that death count.
Can you at least tell us what your numerator and denominator are so we can find the discrepancy? Is this what you're doing? If so, so need to convert decimals to a percent:
(161352/4959541) ≈ 0.04, so survival = 100 - 0.04 = 99.96%
You have an extra 9 in there? Survival rate after having the virus is probably around 99.6%. Maybe two tenths of a percent lower. But not 99.96%
If that’s really the reasoning, then they need to resign. There will be flak if a player gets seriously ill, but they are big boys and should be able to stand behind making the best decision for the universities and the players. The net risk to the players is approximately zero. They will be exposed to more people on the field and in practice, but probably fewer people overall as a result of football sucking up a lot of socializing time. They will get better monitoring and healthcare. And they will pose less risk to their families because they will be on campus.
The reason they shouldn’t play is a lot of people are panicking and are really bad at assessing risk and apparently lawyers have convinced them either that they are going to have lost unity of greater than &50 million, or that they’re going to get their tv money even without a product.
What’s the story with this? Why did they ban Covid liability waivers? And how can they dictate what an individual university chooses to do.
Does giving players the ability to opt out and retain scholarships not enough legally? Guess not.
For these young athletes, I wouldn’t think Covid is a greater risk than a career (or worse) ending head/neck injury..and the NCAA doesn’t seem to have a problem with that waiver.
For the record, I’ve always thought the season was in doubt, shoulda made that bet with whoever that was...but some of the reasoning is bs.
If there was ever a time to say **** you to the NCAA, it’s now..and I know that’s been said before.
Last edited:
There are new studies out that show even asymptotic COVID survivors may have irreparable heart damage. Not exactly what an athlete that puts a massive amount of stress on his heart wants.
My state's legislature passed a law earlier in the year that waives liability on businesses(schools included) if someone catches the rona at their location.
Its basically a blanket waiver.
It's especially important since in this state, minors can't give up their right to sue in the future for injuries, even if their parents sign a waiver.
Why would the ncaa not allow this to be covered like everything else?
I have never thought we would play this year because of all the anti logic used in this thing since the beginning.
Answer me this: How is a school more liable if a player catches COVID during a game or practice vs if a blue chip first round draft pick tears his ACL in practice that surely costs him millions of dollars?
Just as anti matter destroys matter, anti logic destroys logic.
Answer me this: How is a school more liable if a player catches COVID during a game or practice vs if a blue chip first round draft pick tears his ACL in practice that surely costs him millions of dollars?
Just as anti matter destroys matter, anti logic destroys logic.
can you provide a link? Or are you talking about myocarditas? If you are talking about myocarditis it can be caused by any viral or bacterial infection...plus a bunch of other stuff (it’s not new) There are treatments for it and about 60% of the cases heal on their own. Just wondering if they had found something new.
Yes that is it. As you said The article mentions it can happen with any infection and typically goes away. https://www.livescience.com/covid-19-causes-heart-damage-healthy-people.html
It’s just something to keep an eye on.
Chalk me up as saying we will never have a reliable vaccine. We may get one, but I doubt it’s reliable. If so, we would have already had one for the common cold and other strains of coronavirus.
This will run its course and fade before a vaccine is available.
Depends on the definition of reliable...but I agree. Hell the flu vaccine isn’t reliable imo. And you’re right, no vaccine for the common cold, but not sure that’s worth a vaccine as it’s not deadly.
I believe it’s fairly agreed upon that the first generation CV19 vaccines will most likely be a series of injections/boosters.
Hope you are right that it fades, but I’m not so sure. Just hope mutates to a less virulent or dangerous strain.
Yea, even averaging that out over the population, that seems off by an order of magnitude or more.
Here's something interesting on the chances of dying any one day and using that to weigh risks. Would be interesting to see the numbers and how much risk of dying you take from exposure to COVID versus just playing college football.
https://www.spencergreenberg.com/2013/10/which-risks-of-dying-are-worth-taking/
3rd option: They are chickenshit and afraid to make a decision that doesn't follow the crowd. They are basically politicians which is how they got the job in the first place.
Exactly. That would be huge and would be considered a success. It will end up being like the flu shot. You will take it once or twice a year and it will be somewhere between 50-70 % reliable. We will eventually find something that is about as good as Tamiflu is with the flu too. That will get it down to levels we can handle on top of the usual flu. Then we can go back to 2019, provided enough of the anti-vaxx idiots don't hold out and not take the shots.
if SEC cancels football, starkville falls apart by december. Many businesses count on April, Sept-November to stay open and they won't get either? I live in starkville and hope I don't have to sell my house within the next 12 months.......
Nope, it's 96.78 right now in the US.
5.06 Million cases and 163,000 deaths
Divide 163,000 by 5.06 Million = 3.22% death rate
Right, and even though I know I’m taking some liberties with this example, I was kinda thinking about it like this. If you have 10 fans shoulder to shoulder at a football game, under the current circumstances... if the first guy in the row has Covid, there’s a reasonable chance that it’s gonna be spread to the other 10 without proper distancing and PPE.
Now, imagine that all ten fans have the vaccine. Worst case, 50% of them are immune and only 5 get it instead of all 10. Best case, the guy that’s second in line is immune, and he breaks the chain, so 9 out of 10 go home as healthy as they arrived.
Any form of vaccine will hamper the spread immensely
Now, imagine that all ten fans have the vaccine. Worst case, 50% of them are immune and only 5 get it instead of all 10. Best case, the guy that’s second in line is immune, and he breaks the chain, so 9 out of 10 go home as healthy as they arrived.
Any form of vaccine will hamper the spread immensely
Latest
-
01
Maroon and White Football
"Nothing changes": Mississippi State's LJ Prudhomme and Marcus Williams discuss expectations with bruised team
-
02
Maroon and White Football
Shuffled Mississippi State offense puts up yards, but no points in first shutout since 2020
-
03
Maroon and White
Everything Mississippi State HC Jeff Lebby said after LSU loss
-
04
Maroon and White
Rapid Recap: No. 22 LSU 31-0 No. 16 Mississippi State
-
05
Maroon and White
Inside the numbers: Mississippi State-LSU first half stats