Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

2020 CU football season POSTPONED until Nov 6th?

Stefanou coming to practice be like:
tenor.gif
 
Denver_sc said:
Now, I would never call any poster here a complete ****ing moron incapable of any critical thought. However, I might suggest that only a complete ****ing moron incapable of any critical thought would think that

  • Boulder County is anywhere near herd immunity
    • according to the Mayo Clinic, we'd need about 70% of the population to get COVID to achieve herd immunity
    • Boulder County has about 326K residents. Boulder County has confirmed about 4,000 cases of COVID.
    • Only a complete ****ing moron would think that 4,000 is anywhere close to 228,000
  • The costs to the Boulder community would be "worth it" to achieve herd immunity
    • Right now, there have been 79 deaths in Boulder County due to COVID out of 4,000 confirmed cases, meaning about 1.95% of the infected population has died. This is significantly lower than the Colorado and US average (3.03% and 2.86%, respectively)
    • Projecting that out over the population, it means that somewhere between ~4,300 and ~6,700 additional deaths in Boulder county alone would likely be required to get to herd immunity
    • Only a complete ****ing moron incapable of critical thought would suggest that a path towards herd immunity, which has not been confirmed in any other community worldwide, would be better than using the proven method of isolation, contact tracing, testing, and masks
HTH.
Click to expand...
There's a lot of science showing that Herd Immunity Threshold (HIT) is reached long before 70%, might be as low as 15-30%. The science is nowhere close to settled, so there's no reason to go out and find out for ourselves, and even if HIT is that low Boulder is still nowhere near that number.
 
MiamiBuffs said:
“Im ok with spreading a disease, people getting sick, and some dying. So long as my selfish entertainment needs are met”
Click to expand...

I'll try this again. I do not care if CU plays this year. In fact, I prefer that the public not be exposed to the current state of the program by seeing this team take the field in 2020.

But shutting down society for a virus that has a statistically negligible impact on anyone under the age of 60 who is otherwise healthy is insanity. Progressive insanity.
 
buffbuffpass said:
There's a lot of science showing that Herd Immunity Threshold (HIT) is reached long before 70%, might be as low as 15-30%. The science is nowhere close to settled, so there's no reason to go out and find out for ourselves, and even if HIT is that low Boulder is still nowhere near that number.
Click to expand...
Got a link from a reputable source? I linked my source.

EDIT: Sorry, I misread your post; I thought you were making an argument that because it was lower it might be ok.

To put numbers to your post: 15% of 326,000 is 48,900, 30% is 97,800. That's 12-24 times the current number of confirmed cases, and at the death rates I cited above would likely result in ~875-~2,900 additional deaths in Boulder county to hit. So even in a best case scenario that's a lot of extra deaths, not to mention the other long term health impacts.
 
Last edited:
TSchekler said:
Yeah, if it's between granting an exemption for athletics due to XYZ, and the football team and staff going to Golden/Mines to practice and train, I would hope they would allow the exemption. I guess we'll see what happens this evening when the vote goes down and things are set in motion (or not).
Click to expand...

The football team is at much greater risk of getting into a crippling or fatal accident traveling to Golden for practices than they are from COVID.
 
Denver_sc said:
Got a link from a reputable source? I linked my source.

EDIT: Sorry, I misread your post; I thought you were making an argument that because it was lower it might be ok.

To put numbers to your post: 15% of 326,000 is 48,900, 30% is 97,800. That's 12-24 times the current number of confirmed cases, and at the death rates I cited above would likely result in ~875-~2,900 additional deaths in Boulder county to hit. So even in a best case scenario that's a lot of extra deaths, not to mention the other long term health impacts.
Click to expand...
I should clarify what I mean by HIT, not that herd immunity is reached at 15-30% but rather that HIT is reached when a population shows antibodies in 15-30% of the population. More than that 15-30% have been exposed but likely don't produce antibodies. (They're able to fight it off due to T-cells and cross-reactivity most likely)

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/17/health/coronavirus-herd-immunity.html
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...does-it-exist-coronavirus-population-immunity
 
Denver_sc said:
Now, I would never call any poster here a complete ****ing moron incapable of any critical thought. However, I might suggest that only a complete ****ing moron incapable of any critical thought would think that

  • Boulder County is anywhere near herd immunity
    • according to the Mayo Clinic, we'd need about 70% of the population to get COVID to achieve herd immunity
    • Boulder County has about 326K residents. Boulder County has confirmed about 4,000 cases of COVID.
    • Only a complete ****ing moron would think that 4,000 is anywhere close to 228,000
  • The costs to the Boulder community would be "worth it" to achieve herd immunity
    • Right now, there have been 79 deaths in Boulder County due to COVID out of 4,000 confirmed cases, meaning about 1.95% of the infected population has died. This is significantly lower than the Colorado and US average (3.03% and 2.86%, respectively)
    • Projecting that out over the population, it means that somewhere between ~4,300 and ~6,700 additional deaths in Boulder county alone would likely be required to get to herd immunity
    • Only a complete ****ing moron incapable of critical thought would suggest that a path towards herd immunity, which has not been confirmed in any other community worldwide, would be better than using the proven method of isolation, contact tracing, testing, and masks
HTH.
Click to expand...

Please, lock yourself in your residence in Denver. Close all the windows... Stock up on wipes, toilet paper, and hand sanitizer (wait, you already hoarded enough stuff in March). Do not come out until a year after the vaccine, when you might use it...
 
NewEra 2014 said:
I'll try this again. I do not care if CU plays this year. In fact, I prefer that the public not be exposed to the current state of the program by seeing this team take the field in 2020.

But shutting down society for a virus that has a statistically negligible impact on anyone under the age of 60 who is otherwise healthy is insanity. Progressive insanity.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I think playing any games this year is HUGE for the program under KD-any fan in their right mind would look at the timing of Dorrell taking the job and the pandemic and say this is absolutely a year 0 and any games we'd get in 2020 would help for this team moving forward.
 
NewEra 2014 said:
The football team is at much greater risk of getting into a crippling or fatal accident traveling to Golden for practices than they are from COVID.
Click to expand...

Student gets exposed to COVID and then goes home and exposes 15-20 people to this thing. You do the math.
 
TSchekler said:
I'll try this one more time. Death is not the only thing that health officials are concerned about. Do you understand this concept?
Click to expand...
You can question that his delivery of some of his comments are in bad taste, especially considering the audience here, but he's not wrong on the driving correlation. This is directly from the CDC website "Severe heart damage has occurred in young, healthy people, but is rare. There may be more cases of mild effects of COVID-19 on the heart that can be diagnosed with special imaging tests, including in younger people with mild or minimal symptoms; however, the long-term significance of these mild effects on the heart are unknown. CDC will continue to assess and provide updates as new data emerge."

Rare in young healthy people. Long term affects unknown. If we shut everything down on the parameters of "rare and long term affects unknown" we'd still be banging rocks and sticks together wearing loin cloths.

So yes, when deciding which is more likely,
A.) Actually getting the virus AND actually getting complications that would lead to long term effects AND those long term having a significant effect on your heart long term or...
B.) Getting hit by Karen on windey HWY 93 texting a friend while driving about what someone said on the Next door app.

B is statistically a higher risk.

Don't be a douche.
 
Big Iron Buff said:
You can question that his delivery of some of his comments are in bad taste, especially considering the audience here, but he's not wrong on the driving correlation. This is directly from the CDC website "Severe heart damage has occurred in young, healthy people, but is rare. There may be more cases of mild effects of COVID-19 on the heart that can be diagnosed with special imaging tests, including in younger people with mild or minimal symptoms; however, the long-term significance of these mild effects on the heart are unknown. CDC will continue to assess and provide updates as new data emerge."

Rare in young healthy people. Long term affects unknown. If we shut everything down on the parameters of "rare and long term affects unknown" we'd still be banging rocks and sticks together wearing loin cloths.

So yes, when deciding which is more likely,
A.) Actually getting the virus AND actually getting complications that would lead to long term effects AND those long term having a significant effect on your heart long term or...
B.) Getting hit by Karen on windey HWY 93 texting a friend while driving about what someone said on the Next door app.

B is statistically a higher risk.

Don't be a douche.
Click to expand...
'Ppreciate that last part. You don't seem to grasp the concept being discussed either.
 
TSchekler said:
'Ppreciate that last part. You don't seem to grasp the concept being discussed either.
Click to expand...

Oh, I do. I'm just directly replying to your condescending remarks about his comment. The irony is lost on you. Driving is a calculated risk. Practicing football with others in your age range with COVID being active in your county is a calculated risk. For death, both have firm statistical evidence, with driving being SIGNIFICANTLY higher. For future health concerns, rare and unknown. No exact numbers or "we are seeing some strong evidence that there will be significant long term effects, but it's too early to tell." It is essentially, 'we've seen rare instances of significant short term effects, but have no evidence that these minor instances will have significant long term effects, but it is to early to tell and not enough data points.' I can assure you if there was strong evidence it would be rammed down our throats. Politicians and health organizations are in full blown CYA mode. Every possibility, no matter how remote, has to be mentioned.

How rare is rare? CDC didn't give a number. 1 in a 1000 healthy young adults have significant short term heart affects? 1 in a 100,0000? 1 in a million? 1, 2, 10 total? With statistical analysis, when there is a very small sample size, you get vague statements like 'rare'. Reading between the lines you can land at pretty ****ing low.

But please continue to be the beacon of morality and sophistication for the uncultured and uneducated masses. Your virtue is noted.
 
Big Iron Buff said:
Oh, I do. I'm just directly replying to your condescending remarks about his comment. The irony is lost on you. Driving is a calculated risk. Practicing football with others in your age range with COVID being active in your county is a calculated risk. For death, both have firm statistical evidence, with driving being SIGNIFICANTLY higher. For future health concerns, rare and unknown. No exact numbers or "we are seeing some strong evidence that there will be significant long term effects, but it's too early to tell." It is essentially, 'we've seen rare instances of significant short term effects, but have no evidence that these minor instances will have significant long term effects, but it is to early to tell and not enough data points.' I can assure you if there was strong evidence it would be rammed down our throats. Politicians and health organizations are in full blown CYA mode. Every possibility, no matter how remote, has to be mentioned.

How rare is rare? CDC didn't give a number. 1 in a 1000 healthy young adults have significant short term heart affects? 1 in a 100,0000? 1 in a million? 1, 2, 10 total? With statistical analysis, when there is a very small sample size, you get vague statements like 'rare'. Reading between the lines you can land at pretty ****ing low.

But please continue to be the beacon of morality and sophistication for the uncultured and uneducated masses. Your virtue is noted.
Click to expand...

Hilarious. We're 6 months into this pandemic and you want to compare the risk assessment with the risk assessment for driving--which we've been doing for a century. Thanks, Mr. Science!
 
At what point does RG decide there are too many obstacles at CU and bolt for greener pastures?

Limiting staff budgets dictated by state regulations, academic restrictions, due to low tv network revenue - the AD and coach have to go beyond most university timeframes to fundraise (which impacts the HC's time focusing on football), fines for team hikes, city bans on university activities.

Where is the program if he were to go?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top