The restrictions are costing lives. My colonoscopy was cancelled an hour before I was to start taking the laxative. I an vigilant because I am at high risk for colon cancer but am not experiencing symptoms. However there are people who do have cancer that will not be diagnosed in time because of the restrictions. Lives are also being lost in the destruction of businesses and careers. People spend their lives building a business, a practice, or a career. When a business, a practice, or a career is destroyed so is that person's life.

71Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

No football would be a huge mistake. We see how this situation is being managed, globally, nationally and on a state level. The recent admission by the CDC that the number of deaths is 37,000, not 60,000, is the latest evidence.

---

Cmon man. That's been debunked for awhile

---

I linked the image of the CDC form, with footnotes about a week ago. The 37,000 number has been made public much more recently. "Awhile" hasn't had time to transpire.

---

Ok first off, you do understand that your 37k stat is not accurate, correct?

second, things move fast in covid world. while you are spouting 37k deaths, the CDC is now projecting that by June, we could see 3000 deaths PER DAY

---

There is no accurate.

The CDC must be taken with a grain of salt, especially "projecting" and "we could see."

---

Sigh. Now you're making a whole different argument, which is fine I suppose.

Heres what you originally wrote: "No football would be a huge mistake. We see how this situation is being managed, globally, nationally and on a state level. The recent admission by the CDC that the number of deaths is 37,000, not 60,000, is the latest evidence."

You were making the argument that the CDC was more or less incompetent because their so called "admission" that their original number of deaths was inaccurate. We now know the reason for the discrepancy (something you have yet to admit).

Now that you've been called out, you're now making a completely DIFFERENT argument that no numbers are accurate. Which is fine. I'm not going to argue with you there. But again, that's a completely different argument than you were making before.

---

what is the reason for the inaccuracy?

---

Just to be 100% clear:

37k is the death certificates gathered by the CDC. 60k is the notifications of death from individual health departments. Certificates lag behind by 1 to 8 weeks.

It's in the footnotes of what you cite.

There is no debate. They didnt "admit" two different numbers. They admit they are tracking deaths two ways.

It's the difference between counting a murder when the body is found with bullet holes in it, and when the corner signs the certificate. It's the difference between counting the corpses in a northern California town as you pick them up, and counting them 8 weeks later when the autopsy is done.

If you understand company's reporting, 60k is income, 37k is cash. A balance sheet, income, and cash flow all work together to build a picture. They are not conflicting views of the same information. They are the same information from different views.

37k and 60k are NOT conflicting numbers. Dont base so much emphasis on something that has literally no meaning.

---

How come CDC was reporting 60K last week? And, the footnotes in the CDC form I posted say that presumed deaths should be included. Plus, your timeline for autopsy reporting doesn't make sense.

I get the analogy to a company's financial reporting. The difference is that the earnings numbers come in shortly after the revenue. Here, you're purporting an 8 week lag. Is the govt that inefficient? (Oh, wait, did I just ask that?).

---

OK,

Above ALL, the CDC is still reporting 67,463 deaths (at 5/5/2020 10:15 pacific). They did NOT change their reporting. The added an additional resource. I believe that was a mistake, because a large percentage of the population is not educated enough to understand that there can be two methods to counting the same thing, at the same time.

Lets break this down potatohead style:

1. The CDC released a report showing 37k (now 39k) deaths. Everyone went wild about reporting adjustments to official numbers.

Here is the link: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm

This number is the corner reported deaths.

It literally (as in literally) disclaims:

Quote:

---

NOTE: Number of deaths reported in this table are the total number of deaths received and coded as of the date of analysis and do not represent all deaths that occurred in that period.

---

and

Quote:

---

*Data during this period are incomplete because of the lag in time between when the death occurred and when the death certificate is completed, submitted to NCHS and processed for reporting purposes. This delay can range from 1 week to 8 weeks or more, depending on the jurisdiction, age, and cause of death.

---

emphasis mine

Presumed deaths are only counted if the corner reported COVID-19 as the cause of death (apparently ICD10 code U07.1). Presumed but not certificated deaths are not included.

2. The CDC also, still, has a report showing medical reported deaths. This is more timely.

here is the link: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/cases-in-us.html

This data is provided by the 55 Health Departments in the country, using a known case and death (through testing) and probable through meeting clinical criteria AND epidemiologic evidence.

This also has a disclaimer:

Quote:

---

In the event of a discrepancy between CDC cases and cases reported by state and local public health officials, data reported by states should be considered the most up to date.

---

This is the presumptive case count. The CDC gets the numbers reported from the 55 regional health systems, and aggregates them. As with my financial reporting analogy, there may be *some* bad debt that needs to be cleared, but it is more likely that they will revise revenue up as additional deferred revenue is paid.



As for the "Is the govt that inefficient?"
First; The government (CDC) is not that inefficient. It takes time to have a corner look at the people and confirm cause of death. Across 55 jurisdictions, the processes and timelines can be desperate. As Americans we demand this kind of decentralized government authority. But, the CDC still gives a centralized view of the totality: they dont make the data, they just collect and report the data, in this case.

Second; You think 1-8 weeks is a long time? Aapl takes about 5 weeks to report earnings. FedEx takes almost 13 weeks. My company takes about 8 weeks. VERY few companies turn around their data in less than 4 weeks.





FWIW, I agree with some of your points. Specifically that it is looking like a Swedish model may be a better model than our measures, and probably better than China's measures. I think the lockdown did not fundamentally impact mortality more significantly that less strict measures would have, but I have the luxury of not having to make that call, AND having an additional month and a half of data. Things are NOT better now (in California) than they were on March 22. They are MUCH worse (orders of magnitude more infected walking around, so more vectors for infection now), and we are relaxing measures. That tells me that my little opinion is shared by even the most careful people.

That doesnt change that your opener (37k vs 60k count adjustment) is just wrong in its assumption that they changed the numbers. They gave a new metric. TBH, you should absolutely drop the argument, because it is based on a misinterpretation of whatever you read. It also derails the point you are trying to make, by bringing in factually inaccurate arguments.

How many posts have you made espousing the core of your argument? Zero.
How many posts have you made arguing over a misinterpreted data point? 6. So far.

---

It's not which numbers are correct, but the discrepancy and its magnitude that erodes confidence.

Confidence is further eroded when we saw political leaders (including Trump) minimizing the infection in the early weeks and encouraging people to go about their lives as if nothing was happening. This was particularly true of Gov. Cuomo and his Director of Public Health pooh-poohing the danger and arguing that people had nothing to worry about. Pelosi's encouragement of attendance at the Chinese New Year (I think it was) celebration in SF didn't help her and her Party, either. And, if you have been paying attention, it can't have skipped your attention that both Fauci and Birx had been recorded supporting the Left/Dem perspective before the infection was uncovered. Granted, Fauci warned that Trump's first term would face an epidemic, but that was in the context of the history of every modern president having faced one. Still, he said it.

The data issue is further clouded by the presentation of Gov DeSantis of Florida when he announced the initial opening of the state last week. He presented figures which showed that the actual numbers on cases and deaths are 1/10 of what they were predicted to be and FL was not a lock-down state. It's stuff like that which makes the people wonder what they're bankrupting themselves personally for.

My biggest complaint is against those who deny that this thing came on fast, that President Trump took the first actions (CDC) before the first death in the US, that big states had foreclosed their readiness in favor of spending on pet social projects (even President Trump seems to have cleaned house in the epidemiological advisory group, although I took that as exercising his prerogative to put his own people in vs Obama's and I haven't followed whether he completed the transition there), that key leaders criticize him even while distracting him with impeachment and then stood in the way of action, and that there was no understanding in common about what we were facing.

Your presentation is persuasive on the merits of science and health practices, but it seems to ignore the social/political/economic context which infect them. I think everyone's doing a good job, except those who seem not to want a good job to be done.

As to financial reports, I was an implementation project manager for a financial management software company with over 1,000 clients. We had an interactive database across as many as 18 functions which gave real time calculations on big organizations (billion $ budgets). I could give you ye revenue and net figures in seconds and final reports in a day. It would take the finance team another couple days to meet and seal them. I suspect that the CDC and other databases are years out of date and slow, but that's no excuse.

---

The way to address a pandemic is by being proactive rather than reactive. Unless you are fully prepared to take immediate action (i.e., have all necessary supplies, including testing materials, ready to be disseminated across a wide geographic expanse, have all necessary plans to distribute and utilize those supplies in place, etc. etc.), once it manifests itself, it is too late. IMO, that Is where the incumbent President dropped the ball and the American public, in particular small business, is paying the price.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/trump-disbanded-nsc-pandemic-unit-experts-praised-69594177


[url=https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/trump-disbanded-nsc-pandemic-unit-experts-praised-69594177][/url]

---

71, continuing.

Granted, he disbanded or cleaned out the incumbents in the pandemic unit. After winciing and reading the story again, I thought it might have been him exercising his prerogative to get rid of Obama holdovers and put in his own admin, as it has been conceded is his right. I don't know anything about the incumbents or what they had done, if anything. It was a mistake, without further detail.

Rushinbear said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

No football would be a huge mistake. We see how this situation is being managed, globally, nationally and on a state level. The recent admission by the CDC that the number of deaths is 37,000, not 60,000, is the latest evidence.

---

Cmon man. That's been debunked for awhile

---

I linked the image of the CDC form, with footnotes about a week ago. The 37,000 number has been made public much more recently. "Awhile" hasn't had time to transpire.

---

Ok first off, you do understand that your 37k stat is not accurate, correct?

second, things move fast in covid world. while you are spouting 37k deaths, the CDC is now projecting that by June, we could see 3000 deaths PER DAY

---

There is no accurate.

The CDC must be taken with a grain of salt, especially "projecting" and "we could see."

---

Sigh. Now you're making a whole different argument, which is fine I suppose.

Heres what you originally wrote: "No football would be a huge mistake. We see how this situation is being managed, globally, nationally and on a state level. The recent admission by the CDC that the number of deaths is 37,000, not 60,000, is the latest evidence."

You were making the argument that the CDC was more or less incompetent because their so called "admission" that their original number of deaths was inaccurate. We now know the reason for the discrepancy (something you have yet to admit).

Now that you've been called out, you're now making a completely DIFFERENT argument that no numbers are accurate. Which is fine. I'm not going to argue with you there. But again, that's a completely different argument than you were making before.

---

what is the reason for the inaccuracy?

---

Just to be 100% clear:

37k is the death certificates gathered by the CDC. 60k is the notifications of death from individual health departments. Certificates lag behind by 1 to 8 weeks.

It's in the footnotes of what you cite.

There is no debate. They didnt "admit" two different numbers. They admit they are tracking deaths two ways.

It's the difference between counting a murder when the body is found with bullet holes in it, and when the corner signs the certificate. It's the difference between counting the corpses in a northern California town as you pick them up, and counting them 8 weeks later when the autopsy is done.

If you understand company's reporting, 60k is income, 37k is cash. A balance sheet, income, and cash flow all work together to build a picture. They are not conflicting views of the same information. They are the same information from different views.

37k and 60k are NOT conflicting numbers. Dont base so much emphasis on something that has literally no meaning.

---

How come CDC was reporting 60K last week? And, the footnotes in the CDC form I posted say that presumed deaths should be included. Plus, your timeline for autopsy reporting doesn't make sense.

I get the analogy to a company's financial reporting. The difference is that the earnings numbers come in shortly after the revenue. Here, you're purporting an 8 week lag. Is the govt that inefficient? (Oh, wait, did I just ask that?).

---

OK,

Above ALL, the CDC is still reporting 67,463 deaths (at 5/5/2020 10:15 pacific). They did NOT change their reporting. The added an additional resource. I believe that was a mistake, because a large percentage of the population is not educated enough to understand that there can be two methods to counting the same thing, at the same time.

Lets break this down potatohead style:

1. The CDC released a report showing 37k (now 39k) deaths. Everyone went wild about reporting adjustments to official numbers.

Here is the link: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm

This number is the corner reported deaths.

It literally (as in literally) disclaims:

Quote:

---

NOTE: Number of deaths reported in this table are the total number of deaths received and coded as of the date of analysis and do not represent all deaths that occurred in that period.

---

and

Quote:

---

*Data during this period are incomplete because of the lag in time between when the death occurred and when the death certificate is completed, submitted to NCHS and processed for reporting purposes. This delay can range from 1 week to 8 weeks or more, depending on the jurisdiction, age, and cause of death.

---

emphasis mine

Presumed deaths are only counted if the corner reported COVID-19 as the cause of death (apparently ICD10 code U07.1). Presumed but not certificated deaths are not included.

2. The CDC also, still, has a report showing medical reported deaths. This is more timely.

here is the link: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/cases-in-us.html

This data is provided by the 55 Health Departments in the country, using a known case and death (through testing) and probable through meeting clinical criteria AND epidemiologic evidence.

This also has a disclaimer:

Quote:

---

In the event of a discrepancy between CDC cases and cases reported by state and local public health officials, data reported by states should be considered the most up to date.

---

This is the presumptive case count. The CDC gets the numbers reported from the 55 regional health systems, and aggregates them. As with my financial reporting analogy, there may be *some* bad debt that needs to be cleared, but it is more likely that they will revise revenue up as additional deferred revenue is paid.



As for the "Is the govt that inefficient?"
First; The government (CDC) is not that inefficient. It takes time to have a corner look at the people and confirm cause of death. Across 55 jurisdictions, the processes and timelines can be desperate. As Americans we demand this kind of decentralized government authority. But, the CDC still gives a centralized view of the totality: they dont make the data, they just collect and report the data, in this case.

Second; You think 1-8 weeks is a long time? Aapl takes about 5 weeks to report earnings. FedEx takes almost 13 weeks. My company takes about 8 weeks. VERY few companies turn around their data in less than 4 weeks.





FWIW, I agree with some of your points. Specifically that it is looking like a Swedish model may be a better model than our measures, and probably better than China's measures. I think the lockdown did not fundamentally impact mortality more significantly that less strict measures would have, but I have the luxury of not having to make that call, AND having an additional month and a half of data. Things are NOT better now (in California) than they were on March 22. They are MUCH worse (orders of magnitude more infected walking around, so more vectors for infection now), and we are relaxing measures. That tells me that my little opinion is shared by even the most careful people.

That doesnt change that your opener (37k vs 60k count adjustment) is just wrong in its assumption that they changed the numbers. They gave a new metric. TBH, you should absolutely drop the argument, because it is based on a misinterpretation of whatever you read. It also derails the point you are trying to make, by bringing in factually inaccurate arguments.

How many posts have you made espousing the core of your argument? Zero.
How many posts have you made arguing over a misinterpreted data point? 6. So far.

---

As to financial reports, I was an implementation project manager for a financial management software company with over 1,000 clients. We had an interactive database across as many as 18 functions which gave real time calculations on big organizations (billion $ budgets). I could give you ye revenue and net figures in seconds and final reports in a day. It would take the finance team another couple days to meet and seal them. I suspect that the CDC and other databases are years out of date and slow, but that's no excuse.

---

Your software can count dead bodies in real time?

Assuming your position for purposes of argument, the manna from heaven of the virus for Dems only works IF Impeached President Trump and his cronies mess up the response to the virus. If Impeached President Trump does a good job in responding to the virus he has the chance to be a national hero. Additionally, you suggest the Dems. in Congress could have taken steps: WRONG. McConnell and the Trumpist cabal have thwarted virtually every effort by the Dems to accomplish anything in Congress.

MugsVanSant said:

---

The restrictions are costing lives. My colonoscopy was cancelled an hour before I was to start taking the laxative. I an vigilant because I am at high risk for colon cancer but am not experiencing symptoms. However there are people who do have cancer that will not be diagnosed in time because of the restrictions. Lives are also being lost in the destruction of businesses and careers. People spend their lives building a business, a practice, or a career. When a business, a practice, or a career is destroyed so is that person's life.

---

Well done. The Shark has officially been jumped....

Rushinbear said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

No football would be a huge mistake. We see how this situation is being managed, globally, nationally and on a state level. The recent admission by the CDC that the number of deaths is 37,000, not 60,000, is the latest evidence.

---

Cmon man. That's been debunked for awhile

---

I linked the image of the CDC form, with footnotes about a week ago. The 37,000 number has been made public much more recently. "Awhile" hasn't had time to transpire.

---

Ok first off, you do understand that your 37k stat is not accurate, correct?

second, things move fast in covid world. while you are spouting 37k deaths, the CDC is now projecting that by June, we could see 3000 deaths PER DAY

---

There is no accurate.

The CDC must be taken with a grain of salt, especially "projecting" and "we could see."

---

Sigh. Now you're making a whole different argument, which is fine I suppose.

Heres what you originally wrote: "No football would be a huge mistake. We see how this situation is being managed, globally, nationally and on a state level. The recent admission by the CDC that the number of deaths is 37,000, not 60,000, is the latest evidence."

You were making the argument that the CDC was more or less incompetent because their so called "admission" that their original number of deaths was inaccurate. We now know the reason for the discrepancy (something you have yet to admit).

Now that you've been called out, you're now making a completely DIFFERENT argument that no numbers are accurate. Which is fine. I'm not going to argue with you there. But again, that's a completely different argument than you were making before.

---

what is the reason for the inaccuracy?

---

Just to be 100% clear:

37k is the death certificates gathered by the CDC. 60k is the notifications of death from individual health departments. Certificates lag behind by 1 to 8 weeks.

It's in the footnotes of what you cite.

There is no debate. They didnt "admit" two different numbers. They admit they are tracking deaths two ways.

It's the difference between counting a murder when the body is found with bullet holes in it, and when the corner signs the certificate. It's the difference between counting the corpses in a northern California town as you pick them up, and counting them 8 weeks later when the autopsy is done.

If you understand company's reporting, 60k is income, 37k is cash. A balance sheet, income, and cash flow all work together to build a picture. They are not conflicting views of the same information. They are the same information from different views.

37k and 60k are NOT conflicting numbers. Dont base so much emphasis on something that has literally no meaning.

---

How come CDC was reporting 60K last week? And, the footnotes in the CDC form I posted say that presumed deaths should be included. Plus, your timeline for autopsy reporting doesn't make sense.

I get the analogy to a company's financial reporting. The difference is that the earnings numbers come in shortly after the revenue. Here, you're purporting an 8 week lag. Is the govt that inefficient? (Oh, wait, did I just ask that?).

---

I work for the same government as my colleagues at the CDC. Let's not forget that if you cross the political message with the science message the scientist disappears, but not the politician (yet). This is what is so dangerous about your government. The amount of challenging of fact that is going on is undermining reality and the ability to govern. While this has happened since the beginning of government, there have always been a strong thread of protection as a civil servant towards the truth and your obligation to the Constitution. You always knew that if you followed the procedures put in place by Congress, the people and the laws that govern this land that truth and fact spoke louder than politics. Not anymore. Blame the CDC, blame the Governor, blame the Chinese, but at the end of the day all politics are local and it will be the people who decide when it is appropriate to go back to work, send their kids back to school and when College football will be back to "normal". I know several people who have been test for COVID and received positive results, some have been pretty much unscathed by their infection, however, I also contrast that with my neighbor's 18 year old grandson who contracted it and was on a ventilator for several weeks at NIH. So while I do believe only 2-3% of the population has been infected to date, I don't care to see what that looks like when 70% of the population has been infected. Whether that happens in 9 months or 18 months the grim possibility that I or an 11 year old could die is very real to me.

MugsVanSant said:

---

The restrictions are costing lives. My colonoscopy was cancelled an hour before I was to start taking the laxative. I an vigilant because I am at high risk for colon cancer but am not experiencing symptoms. However there are people who do have cancer that will not be diagnosed in time because of the restrictions. Lives are also being lost in the destruction of businesses and careers. People spend their lives building a business, a practice, or a career. When a business, a practice, or a career is destroyed so is that person's life.

---

Mugs, we must both be over 50. I too had a colonoscopy cancelled due to COVID and still have the Drain-o that the doctor prescribed siting in the bag that I picked it up from the pharmacy. I suppose I could be at risk for colon cancer, but who really knows? I've learned that I could reschedule my colonoscopy as well as my wisdom tooth removal, which was also cancelled. I choose to do neither, because I don't feel I need to risk it.

Question: Do you think there is a way to let some people choose to move on from the social distancing and closed economy but allocate the risk they choose to accept to hit their own pocket books if they get COVID? I don't want to pay for your treatment if you don't like the restrictions or choose not to follow them. Let's be honest, medical care in this country is priced among other things on risk to get a disease and is socialized across all health insurance buyers.

Big C said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Thank you. I didn't have the time nor inclination to explain this to him in detail. Especially considering he could've just googled this and got an answer. Life must be hard when you can't trust a single thing the evil mainstream media has to say.

---

ducky, if you're addressing me, yes, I am extremely frustrated that I can't trust a single thing that the evil mainstream media (your words, said in jest, I get) has to say. In case you care to mount a reply, I include Fox increasingly among them. Sadly, the media "on the other side" OANN, etc., are untrustworthy, too. Where is Walter Cronkite when we need him. I guess these days, news outlets can no longer sell neutral news reporting.

---

If Walter Cronkite was in his prime right now and doing the CBS news every evening, what do you suppose he would be saying?

---

Unfortunately, if Cronkite were in his prime, Trump and his acolytes would declare him part of Lame Stream Media and a purveyor of fake news.

btw, I, too, loved Asimov. What I didn't love was that his daughter was the Comical writer who would only write hit pieces about Cal.

Sadly, Walter Cronkite would not be Walter Cronkite in this world. The world he lived in had the FCC Fairness Doctrine https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_fairness_doctrine

It also had the personal attack rule https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_attack_rule.

UrsaMajor said:

---

Big C said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Thank you. I didn't have the time nor inclination to explain this to him in detail. Especially considering he could've just googled this and got an answer. Life must be hard when you can't trust a single thing the evil mainstream media has to say.

---

ducky, if you're addressing me, yes, I am extremely frustrated that I can't trust a single thing that the evil mainstream media (your words, said in jest, I get) has to say. In case you care to mount a reply, I include Fox increasingly among them. Sadly, the media "on the other side" OANN, etc., are untrustworthy, too. Where is Walter Cronkite when we need him. I guess these days, news outlets can no longer sell neutral news reporting.

---

If Walter Cronkite was in his prime right now and doing the CBS news every evening, what do you suppose he would be saying?

---

Unfortunately, if Cronkite were in his prime, Trump and his acolytes would declare him part of Lame Stream Media and a purveyor of fake news.

btw, I, too, loved Asimov. What I didn't love was that his daughter was the Comical writer who would only write hit pieces about Cal.

---

I doubt Cronkite would be working for CBS today. More likely he would be at Fox News.

Niece, not daughter...not that that really matters.

"btw, I, too, loved Asimov. What I didn't love was that his daughter was the Comical writer who would only write hit pieces about Cal."

Chabbear said:

---

We need Hari Seldon to predict what the world will do. Two points if you know who he is without looking him up.

---

free clue: late great Asimov rocks "Big Time"@
bonus spoiler: in the fullness of time the Mule dies, as one does.

=============
cybears @opyright Blueblood

smh said:

---

Chabbear said:

---

We need Hari Seldon to predict what the world will do. Two points if you know who he is without looking him up.

---

free clue: late great Asimov rocks Big Time
double bonus: eventually the Mule dies, as one does.

---

Ssshhh! I am re-reading the series. Don't spoil it for me.

bonsallbear said:

---

> Ssshhh! I am re-reading the series. Don't spoil it for me..

>> smh said:
>> free clue: late great Asimov rocks Big Time
>> double bonus: eventually the **** dies, as one does.

---

rereading auto-voids warranties anyways. ahh well, zipt

62bear said:

---

IssyBear said:

---

Chabbear said:

---

The big elephant in the room is that without football revenues, other D-1 athletic programs die unless one of a few things happen:

1. Sport is fully endowed
2. College picks up the tab
3. Donations increase to support the sports kept.
4. Other revenues found.
5.???

Wild cards:
1. Title 9.
2. NCAA rules about the number of sports to remain eligible for D-1
3. Conference rules about sports that must be included to be in the conference (Pac 12: Football, Men and Women Basketball, Women Volleyball)
4. Tax support from Congress
5. ??

---

This is at a time when the university itself is having a tremendous loss of funding. Loss of student housing revenue is a real killer, costs to shift to on-line learning have been excessive, and with the State of California's own financial losses (we only get 40% of our education support from the state anyway) will prevent us from getting any help from Sacramento.

---

40% support for UC from the state? That number is a heck of a lot closer to 10%. Had not given enough thought to this topic to think about the shortfall from the lack of student housing fees. This is really going to turn the world of college on its head. How long until private schools of dubious quality start shutting down? What's the first "big name" private that isn't a for-profit commuter school to take a dirt nap? I'm thinking of places like Pacific.

---

I have seen projections that 500 private schools close for good this year. No matter how you slice it there will be a lot of carnage.

Schools will have to have very clear policies on what tuition means, refunds, etc. This is going to be the Attorney full employment act.

You owe me a beer too Chabbear. I saw the name Hari Seldon in your post and the mind started wandering, as it does, and then a couple of seconds later after burrowing through 40 years of detritus it came to me, the psychohistorian from the wonderful Foundation Trilogy. Maybe I owe you a beer.

CALiforniALUM said:

---

MugsVanSant said:

---

The restrictions are costing lives. My colonoscopy was cancelled an hour before I was to start taking the laxative. I an vigilant because I am at high risk for colon cancer but am not experiencing symptoms. However there are people who do have cancer that will not be diagnosed in time because of the restrictions. Lives are also being lost in the destruction of businesses and careers. People spend their lives building a business, a practice, or a career. When a business, a practice, or a career is destroyed so is that person's life.

---

Mugs, we must both be over 50. I too had a colonoscopy cancelled due to COVID and still have the Drain-o that the doctor prescribed siting in the bag that I picked it up from the pharmacy. I suppose I could be at risk for colon cancer, but who really knows? I've learned that I could reschedule my colonoscopy as well as my wisdom tooth removal, which was also cancelled. I choose to do neither, because I don't feel I need to risk it.

Question: Do you think there is a way to let some people choose to move on from the social distancing and closed economy but allocate the risk they choose to accept to hit their own pocket books if they get COVID? I don't want to pay for your treatment if you don't like the restrictions or choose not to follow them. Let's be honest, medical care in this country is priced among other things on risk to get a disease and is socialized across all health insurance buyers.

---

Funny, I had my appt for that as well and am waiting for it.

BTW, in NY, Zero 0-17 year olds died. So I think your neighbor's GS is an outlier in this case. I hope for his speedy recovery.

Hari Seldon fans! First game at Memorial, we need to meet for a beer before the game. I will try to remind you then. I owe beers to two, ok, WoodlandBear, I will buy yours too! Other fans are welcome too! Cal equals Trantor University that day!

Go Bears

Chabbear said:

---

Hari Seldon fans! First game at Memorial we need to meet for a beer before the game. I will try to remind you then. I owe beers to two, ok, WoodlandBear, I will buy yours too! Other fans are welcome too! Cal equals Trantor University that day!

Go Bears

---

Umm, we should live so long?? But seriously, you're too nice Chabbear.

Next author/book to pitch? Dunno, but bears could do alot worse than John Scalzi's rookie page turner, waayback from 1999 "Agent To The Stars". Not too shabby, and has a smart-"doggy", yes he is. But again puhlease.. No Spoilers.

Rushinbear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

No football would be a huge mistake. We see how this situation is being managed, globally, nationally and on a state level. The recent admission by the CDC that the number of deaths is 37,000, not 60,000, is the latest evidence.

---

Cmon man. That's been debunked for awhile

---

I linked the image of the CDC form, with footnotes about a week ago. The 37,000 number has been made public much more recently. "Awhile" hasn't had time to transpire.

---

Ok first off, you do understand that your 37k stat is not accurate, correct?

second, things move fast in covid world. while you are spouting 37k deaths, the CDC is now projecting that by June, we could see 3000 deaths PER DAY

---

There is no accurate.

The CDC must be taken with a grain of salt, especially "projecting" and "we could see."

---

Sigh. Now you're making a whole different argument, which is fine I suppose.

Heres what you originally wrote: "No football would be a huge mistake. We see how this situation is being managed, globally, nationally and on a state level. The recent admission by the CDC that the number of deaths is 37,000, not 60,000, is the latest evidence."

You were making the argument that the CDC was more or less incompetent because their so called "admission" that their original number of deaths was inaccurate. We now know the reason for the discrepancy (something you have yet to admit).

Now that you've been called out, you're now making a completely DIFFERENT argument that no numbers are accurate. Which is fine. I'm not going to argue with you there. But again, that's a completely different argument than you were making before.

---

what is the reason for the inaccuracy?

---

Just to be 100% clear:

37k is the death certificates gathered by the CDC. 60k is the notifications of death from individual health departments. Certificates lag behind by 1 to 8 weeks.

It's in the footnotes of what you cite.

There is no debate. They didnt "admit" two different numbers. They admit they are tracking deaths two ways.

It's the difference between counting a murder when the body is found with bullet holes in it, and when the corner signs the certificate. It's the difference between counting the corpses in a northern California town as you pick them up, and counting them 8 weeks later when the autopsy is done.

If you understand company's reporting, 60k is income, 37k is cash. A balance sheet, income, and cash flow all work together to build a picture. They are not conflicting views of the same information. They are the same information from different views.

37k and 60k are NOT conflicting numbers. Dont base so much emphasis on something that has literally no meaning.

---

How come CDC was reporting 60K last week? And, the footnotes in the CDC form I posted say that presumed deaths should be included. Plus, your timeline for autopsy reporting doesn't make sense.

I get the analogy to a company's financial reporting. The difference is that the earnings numbers come in shortly after the revenue. Here, you're purporting an 8 week lag. Is the govt that inefficient? (Oh, wait, did I just ask that?).

---

OK,

Above ALL, the CDC is still reporting 67,463 deaths (at 5/5/2020 10:15 pacific). They did NOT change their reporting. The added an additional resource. I believe that was a mistake, because a large percentage of the population is not educated enough to understand that there can be two methods to counting the same thing, at the same time.

Lets break this down potatohead style:

1. The CDC released a report showing 37k (now 39k) deaths. Everyone went wild about reporting adjustments to official numbers.

Here is the link: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm

This number is the corner reported deaths.

It literally (as in literally) disclaims:

Quote:

---

NOTE: Number of deaths reported in this table are the total number of deaths received and coded as of the date of analysis and do not represent all deaths that occurred in that period.

---

and

Quote:

---

*Data during this period are incomplete because of the lag in time between when the death occurred and when the death certificate is completed, submitted to NCHS and processed for reporting purposes. This delay can range from 1 week to 8 weeks or more, depending on the jurisdiction, age, and cause of death.

---

emphasis mine

Presumed deaths are only counted if the corner reported COVID-19 as the cause of death (apparently ICD10 code U07.1). Presumed but not certificated deaths are not included.

2. The CDC also, still, has a report showing medical reported deaths. This is more timely.

here is the link: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/cases-in-us.html

This data is provided by the 55 Health Departments in the country, using a known case and death (through testing) and probable through meeting clinical criteria AND epidemiologic evidence.

This also has a disclaimer:

Quote:

---

In the event of a discrepancy between CDC cases and cases reported by state and local public health officials, data reported by states should be considered the most up to date.

---

This is the presumptive case count. The CDC gets the numbers reported from the 55 regional health systems, and aggregates them. As with my financial reporting analogy, there may be *some* bad debt that needs to be cleared, but it is more likely that they will revise revenue up as additional deferred revenue is paid.



As for the "Is the govt that inefficient?"
First; The government (CDC) is not that inefficient. It takes time to have a corner look at the people and confirm cause of death. Across 55 jurisdictions, the processes and timelines can be desperate. As Americans we demand this kind of decentralized government authority. But, the CDC still gives a centralized view of the totality: they dont make the data, they just collect and report the data, in this case.

Second; You think 1-8 weeks is a long time? Aapl takes about 5 weeks to report earnings. FedEx takes almost 13 weeks. My company takes about 8 weeks. VERY few companies turn around their data in less than 4 weeks.





FWIW, I agree with some of your points. Specifically that it is looking like a Swedish model may be a better model than our measures, and probably better than China's measures. I think the lockdown did not fundamentally impact mortality more significantly that less strict measures would have, but I have the luxury of not having to make that call, AND having an additional month and a half of data. Things are NOT better now (in California) than they were on March 22. They are MUCH worse (orders of magnitude more infected walking around, so more vectors for infection now), and we are relaxing measures. That tells me that my little opinion is shared by even the most careful people.

That doesnt change that your opener (37k vs 60k count adjustment) is just wrong in its assumption that they changed the numbers. They gave a new metric. TBH, you should absolutely drop the argument, because it is based on a misinterpretation of whatever you read. It also derails the point you are trying to make, by bringing in factually inaccurate arguments.

How many posts have you made espousing the core of your argument? Zero.
How many posts have you made arguing over a misinterpreted data point? 6. So far.

---

It's not which numbers are correct, but the discrepancy and its magnitude that erodes confidence.

Confidence is further eroded when we saw political leaders (including Trump) minimizing the infection in the early weeks and encouraging people to go about their lives as if nothing was happening. This was particularly true of Gov. Cuomo and his Director of Public Health pooh-poohing the danger and arguing that people had nothing to worry about. Pelosi's encouragement of attendance at the Chinese New Year (I think it was) celebration in SF didn't help her and her Party, either. And, if you have been paying attention, it can't have skipped your attention that both Fauci and Birx had been recorded supporting the Left/Dem perspective before the infection was uncovered. Granted, Fauci warned that Trump's first term would face an epidemic, but that was in the context of the history of every modern president having faced one. Still, he said it.

The data issue is further clouded by the presentation of Gov DeSantis of Florida when he announced the initial opening of the state last week. He presented figures which showed that the actual numbers on cases and deaths are 1/10 of what they were predicted to be and FL was not a lock-down state. It's stuff like that which makes the people wonder what they're bankrupting themselves personally for.

My biggest complaint is against those who deny that this thing came on fast, that President Trump took the first actions (CDC) before the first death in the US, that big states had foreclosed their readiness in favor of spending on pet social projects (even President Trump seems to have cleaned house in the epidemiological advisory group, although I took that as exercising his prerogative to put his own people in vs Obama's and I haven't followed whether he completed the transition there), that key leaders criticize him even while distracting him with impeachment and then stood in the way of action, and that there was no understanding in common about what we were facing.

Your presentation is persuasive on the merits of science and health practices, but it seems to ignore the social/political/economic context which infect them. I think everyone's doing a good job, except those who seem not to want a good job to be done.

As to financial reports, I was an implementation project manager for a financial management software company with over 1,000 clients. We had an interactive database across as many as 18 functions which gave real time calculations on big organizations (billion $ budgets). I could give you ye revenue and net figures in seconds and final reports in a day. It would take the finance team another couple days to meet and seal them. I suspect that the CDC and other databases are years out of date and slow, but that's no excuse.

---

The way to address a pandemic is by being proactive rather than reactive. Unless you are fully prepared to take immediate action (i.e., have all necessary supplies, including testing materials, ready to be disseminated across a wide geographic expanse, have all necessary plans to distribute and utilize those supplies in place, etc. etc.), once it manifests itself, it is too late. IMO, that Is where the incumbent President dropped the ball and the American public, in particular small business, is paying the price.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/trump-disbanded-nsc-pandemic-unit-experts-praised-69594177


[url=https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/trump-disbanded-nsc-pandemic-unit-experts-praised-69594177][/url]

---

71, continuing.

Granted, he disbanded or cleaned out the incumbents in the pandemic unit. After winciing and reading the story again, I thought it might have been him exercising his prerogative to get rid of Obama holdovers and put in his own admin, as it has been conceded is his right. I don't know anything about the incumbents or what they had done, if anything. It was a mistake, without further detail.

---

Oh please. Enough already with the "nobody knew" or the "everyone was equally wrong" arguments.

The Prez had the greatest access to the most uptodate and most complete information from all his intelligence services that no Democrat had. Adar his Homeland Security Chief warned him repeatedly. CDC warned him. His national security advisors warned him. He received weekly reports describing the coming catastrophe. They reported to him and not to any Democrats.

It has all been reported in detail with names and dates in the front page Sunday NYT article of a few weeks ago.

The Prez refused to listen. He has and has never had any respect for science and facts. He felt hat he could rely on his "gut" feeling instead of reports from his He thought the reports were unnecessarily alarmist. He thought it would make his administration look weak.

Having been proven wrong he has returned to his old stand by:"deny, lie, obfuscate, and blame someone else". It works with those who will believe anything he says and refuse to think for themselves. There is no one so blind as one who will not see.

Apart from the 70,000+ deaths, a crashed economy, making the US a laughing stock in China, Russia, and Europe and ripping up the Constitution, the Prez has done a great job.

Walter Cronkite is rolling over in his grave, saying "Here I thought Nixon was bad... "

I do not see a real path forward for games. Not this year anyway. Too many questions and nowhere near enough answers. You need a significant number of folks just to run a practice. There are 100 players counting walkons, coaches, support staff including the folks that feed the team etc. Probably over 200 at a minimum.

Physical distance policies as currently constructed will not allow gatherings of this size for months. There are several phases that need to be met before these sort of gatherings will be allowed. LA Mayor Garcetti has already said he is forbidding large gatherings through the balance of 2020. He may give some ground but how much and when? Oh there are 2 major college and 2 NFL teams in that area. That is just LA. Bay Area has 3 college teams and the 49ers.

These games will not be played in Modoc county They will be played in stadiums and will have officials and others present even if no fans. Teams will need to travel. That means airplanes, airports and hotels at a minimum. The game itself is played at close quarters with a ton of physical contact. No distancing there.

Not every coach is young and in great physical condition. Some are no doubt compromised to some degree. How about the staffers. All young and in the prime of their life? The likelihood that someone from some program somewhere gets this virus is enormous. What do you you if one of the servers on the foodline gets it?

How often do you test? What do you do if a player tests positive? These are real questions and what if there are players that choose not to participate? There are all sorts of science questions that there are no real answers to, and of course there are the politics of it as well.

Anyone thinks that politics (on either side) will not play a role are simply delusional. College Presidents and Governors have to sign off on this idea of games. That seems like a major leap of faith with a lot to lose. ADs need the revenue that the games provide. No football will crush many an AD. Sports may get cut etc.

I love the games. I want there to be football, with fans in the stands. On time with a full schedule. Right now we are arguing whether it is wise for a barber shop to open or if people should be allowed on the beach. And somehow there is the belief that we can get a consensus from a lot of people to begin the process of games? I want to believe it, but that seems like a pipe dream.

I read these forums every day and there are tons of different viewpoints from a lot of well informed people. No consensus view. That is what we have all over the country as we try and beat back this virus and get back to a "normal" life. I am making no opinion on whether the games should or should not proceed or what sort of alternative should occur. I do not have a vote in that. But as an observer I do not see any way to get everything that would need to happen for football to occur in the short amount of time it would need to occur.

Too many questions with no answers and time is running out if there are to be games.

Big C said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Thank you. I didn't have the time nor inclination to explain this to him in detail. Especially considering he could've just googled this and got an answer. Life must be hard when you can't trust a single thing the evil mainstream media has to say.

---

ducky, if you're addressing me, yes, I am extremely frustrated that I can't trust a single thing that the evil mainstream media (your words, said in jest, I get) has to say. In case you care to mount a reply, I include Fox increasingly among them. Sadly, the media "on the other side" OANN, etc., are untrustworthy, too. Where is Walter Cronkite when we need him. I guess these days, news outlets can no longer sell neutral news reporting.

---

If Walter Cronkite was in his prime right now and doing the CBS news every evening, what do you suppose he would be saying?

---

The best way to pare this with media is that I never knew Walter Cronkite's political persuasion (which was quite liberal) until just before his career ended. And I would be opposed to what I perceive his views to be. But you didn't know unless you "went looking for it" which you did not need to do because of the objectivity of his behavior. Absolutely NOT SO today. And that goes for left and right. Everyone looks to be the next Woodward/Bernstein with the next gotcha. Not good.

6956bear said:

---

I do not see a real path forward for games. Not this year anyway. Too many questions and nowhere near enough answers. You need a significant number of folks just to run a practice. There are 100 players counting walkons, coaches, support staff including the folks that feed the team etc. Probably over 200 at a minimum.

Physical distance policies as currently constructed will not allow gatherings of this size for months. There are several phases that need to be met before these sort of gatherings will be allowed. LA Mayor Garcetti has already said he is forbidding large gatherings through the balance of 2020. He may give some ground but how much and when? Oh there are 2 major college and 2 NFL teams in that area. That is just LA. Bay Area has 3 college teams and the 49ers.

These games will not be played in Modoc county They will be played in stadiums and will have officials and others present even if no fans. Teams will need to travel. That means airplanes, airports and hotels at a minimum. The game itself is played at close quarters with a ton of physical contact. No distancing there.

Not every coach is young and in great physical condition. Some are no doubt compromised to some degree. How about the staffers. All young and in the prime of their life? The likelihood that someone from some program somewhere gets this virus is enormous. What do you you if one of the servers on the foodline gets it?

How often do you test? What do you do if a player tests positive? These are real questions and what if there are players that choose not to participate? There are all sorts of science questions that there are no real answers to, and of course there are the politics of it as well.

Anyone thinks that politics (on either side) will not play a role are simply delusional. College Presidents and Governors have to sign off on this idea of games. That seems like a major leap of faith with a lot to lose. ADs need the revenue that the games provide. No football will crush many an AD. Sports may get cut etc.

I love the games. I want there to be football, with fans in the stands. On time with a full schedule. Right now we are arguing whether it is wise for a barber shop to open or if people should be allowed on the beach. And somehow there is the belief that we can get a consensus from a lot of people to begin the process of games? I want to believe it, but that seems like a pipe dream.

I read these forums every day and there are tons of different viewpoints from a lot of well informed people. No consensus view. That is what we have all over the country as we try and beat back this virus and get back to a "normal" life. I am making no opinion on whether the games should or should not proceed or what sort of alternative should occur. I do not have a vote in that. But as an observer I do not see any way to get everything that would need to happen for football to occur in the short amount of time it would need to occur.

Too many questions with no answers and time is running out if there are to be games.

---

I would agree playing a full schedule in the fall is problematic. That is why I would not be surprised to see football played beginning late this year into the first couple months of next year. Colleges can not afford to lose the entire season. They will figure out a way to play the games.

Heck, the first Big Game was played in March......

71Bear said:

---

6956bear said:

---

I do not see a real path forward for games. Not this year anyway. Too many questions and nowhere near enough answers. You need a significant number of folks just to run a practice. There are 100 players counting walkons, coaches, support staff including the folks that feed the team etc. Probably over 200 at a minimum.

Physical distance policies as currently constructed will not allow gatherings of this size for months. There are several phases that need to be met before these sort of gatherings will be allowed. LA Mayor Garcetti has already said he is forbidding large gatherings through the balance of 2020. He may give some ground but how much and when? Oh there are 2 major college and 2 NFL teams in that area. That is just LA. Bay Area has 3 college teams and the 49ers.

These games will not be played in Modoc county They will be played in stadiums and will have officials and others present even if no fans. Teams will need to travel. That means airplanes, airports and hotels at a minimum. The game itself is played at close quarters with a ton of physical contact. No distancing there.

Not every coach is young and in great physical condition. Some are no doubt compromised to some degree. How about the staffers. All young and in the prime of their life? The likelihood that someone from some program somewhere gets this virus is enormous. What do you you if one of the servers on the foodline gets it?

How often do you test? What do you do if a player tests positive? These are real questions and what if there are players that choose not to participate? There are all sorts of science questions that there are no real answers to, and of course there are the politics of it as well.

Anyone thinks that politics (on either side) will not play a role are simply delusional. College Presidents and Governors have to sign off on this idea of games. That seems like a major leap of faith with a lot to lose. ADs need the revenue that the games provide. No football will crush many an AD. Sports may get cut etc.

I love the games. I want there to be football, with fans in the stands. On time with a full schedule. Right now we are arguing whether it is wise for a barber shop to open or if people should be allowed on the beach. And somehow there is the belief that we can get a consensus from a lot of people to begin the process of games? I want to believe it, but that seems like a pipe dream.

I read these forums every day and there are tons of different viewpoints from a lot of well informed people. No consensus view. That is what we have all over the country as we try and beat back this virus and get back to a "normal" life. I am making no opinion on whether the games should or should not proceed or what sort of alternative should occur. I do not have a vote in that. But as an observer I do not see any way to get everything that would need to happen for football to occur in the short amount of time it would need to occur.

Too many questions with no answers and time is running out if there are to be games.

---

I would agree playing a full schedule in the fall is problematic. That is why I would not be surprised to see football played beginning late this year into the first couple months of next year. Colleges can not afford to lose the entire season. They will figure out a way to play the games.

Heck, the first Big Game was played in March......

---

Where there is money, people find a way. Players are at minimal risk. Outside activity appears to be minimal risk. Coaches can observe from above and have grad assistants run drills and run the sideline on gameday.. They could probably get n-95 masks for coaches and officials by that time if they have to. I think they find a way. The TV check is too large.

I'd be interested to see if colleges don't go to the networks and say "look if you don't give us more money, we can't make this work financially, so pay more or we don't play" and knowing how they are hurting for programming, getting them to pony up more.

I haven't read all the posts on this thread so I can't say whether this is been discussed already or not.

Just spitballin here but it seems to me that game Day revenue could be generated to a large extent by pay per view........ Say $10 per household per game. I know the networks would have to restructure their existing contracts but it could be done. There are a number of ways the $$ could be divied up to make it fair to all conference members. This helps minimize the virus spread,keeps the Ads afloat, and helps satisfy our competitive needs. I recognize there are many details that need to be fed into this. I'm just looking for solutions.

bonsallbear said:

---

I haven't read all the posts on this thread so I can't say whether this is been discussed already or not.

Just spitballin here but it seems to me that game Day revenue could be generated to a large extent by pay per view........ Say $10 per household per game. I know the networks would have to restructure their existing contracts but it could be done. There are a number of ways the $$ could be divied up to make it fair to all conference members. This helps minimize the virus spread,keeps the Ads afloat, and helps satisfy our competitive needs. I recognize there are many details that need to be fed into this. I'm just looking for solutions.

---

Not bad.

Rushinbear said:

---

bonsallbear said:

---

I haven't read all the posts on this thread so I can't say whether this is been discussed already or not.

Just spitballin here but it seems to me that game Day revenue could be generated to a large extent by pay per view........ Say $10 per household per game. I know the networks would have to restructure their existing contracts but it could be done. There are a number of ways the $$ could be divied up to make it fair to all conference members. This helps minimize the virus spread,keeps the Ads afloat, and helps satisfy our competitive needs. I recognize there are many details that need to be fed into this. I'm just looking for solutions.

---

Not bad.

---

I guess I am confused. Television is already under contract to pay millions to the conference for the rights to televise games. Why would the conference want to forfeit those millions for a PPV pittance?

Join us in an easy cheer!


"Mmmmmmmmmmm
Mountain West
isssssssssssss
the Best!

Professional soccer in Germany has been cleared to resume next weekend.

The pandemic started about the same time in the US as in Germany. Germany has had virtually the same death total as in an average flu year. The NY pandemic cycle will end later this month.

Nearly all professional sports in Europe will be back and running by August.I don't see why college football shouldn't be held this Fall as planned. The only question should be about the attendance. At the very least, they should allow students and younger fans in.

Cal88 said:

---

Professional soccer in Germany has been cleared to resume next weekend.

The pandemic started about the same time in the US as in Germany. Germany has had virtually the same death total as in an average flu year. The NY pandemic cycle will end later this month.

Nearly all professional sports in Europe will be back and running by August.I don't see why college football shouldn't be held this Fall as planned. The only question should be about the attendance. At the very least, they should allow students and younger fans in.

---

You should be governor...or...or maybe even President!

Blueblood said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Professional soccer in Germany has been cleared to resume next weekend.

The pandemic started about the same time in the US as in Germany. Germany has had virtually the same death total as in an average flu year. The NY pandemic cycle will end later this month.

Nearly all professional sports in Europe will be back and running by August.I don't see why college football shouldn't be held this Fall as planned. The only question should be about the attendance. At the very least, they should allow students and younger fans in.

---

You should be governor...or...or maybe even President!

---

Maybe he IS president?

71Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

bonsallbear said:

---

I haven't read all the posts on this thread so I can't say whether this is been discussed already or not.

Just spitballin here but it seems to me that game Day revenue could be generated to a large extent by pay per view........ Say $10 per household per game. I know the networks would have to restructure their existing contracts but it could be done. There are a number of ways the $$ could be divied up to make it fair to all conference members. This helps minimize the virus spread,keeps the Ads afloat, and helps satisfy our competitive needs. I recognize there are many details that need to be fed into this. I'm just looking for solutions.

---

Not bad.

---

I guess I am confused. Television is already under contract to pay millions to the conference for the rights to televise games. Why would the conference want to forfeit those millions for a PPV pittance?

---

Maybe the PPV pittance puts an additional $50K per game into the member's pocket? Maybe many of us get to see some games we wouldn't ordinarily see like students, and those who don't live anywhere near the stadium.
Just asking. It doesn't have to be either or.

bonsallbear said:

---

UrsaMajor said:

---

Big C said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Thank you. I didn't have the time nor inclination to explain this to him in detail. Especially considering he could've just googled this and got an answer. Life must be hard when you can't trust a single thing the evil mainstream media has to say.

---

ducky, if you're addressing me, yes, I am extremely frustrated that I can't trust a single thing that the evil mainstream media (your words, said in jest, I get) has to say. In case you care to mount a reply, I include Fox increasingly among them. Sadly, the media "on the other side" OANN, etc., are untrustworthy, too. Where is Walter Cronkite when we need him. I guess these days, news outlets can no longer sell neutral news reporting.

---

If Walter Cronkite was in his prime right now and doing the CBS news every evening, what do you suppose he would be saying?

---

Unfortunately, if Cronkite were in his prime, Trump and his acolytes would declare him part of Lame Stream Media and a purveyor of fake news.

btw, I, too, loved Asimov. What I didn't love was that his daughter was the Comical writer who would only write hit pieces about Cal.

---

I doubt Cronkite would be working for CBS today. More likely he would be at Fox News.

---

Lol, maybe if he were 70 years younger, blonde and female, or an ex-house painter blow hard.

Cal88 said:

---

Professional soccer in Germany has been cleared to resume next weekend.

The pandemic started about the same time in the US as in Germany. Germany has had virtually the same death total as in an average flu year. The NY pandemic cycle will end later this month.

Nearly all professional sports in Europe will be back and running by August.I don't see why college football shouldn't be held this Fall as planned. The only question should be about the attendance. At the very least, they should allow students and younger fans in.

---

Someone sees right through the BS and is being logical. Now let the chastising begin since it's something a Republican would say.