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?

BUFFS14 said:
If other conferences play, and pull this off with little to no real issues or outbreaks,( I doubt this happens, but for sake of the argument) dues this just prove the ineptitude of the PAC12 leadership and damage the Pac12 even more? We are already behind every other P5 conference in money, and now getting a loan to make up for some lost revenue, just puts us more behind.
Click to expand...
The answer to your direct question is yes.

The probability of the other conferences avoiding an outbreak is at best 5% given the horrific job most of the states where the $EC, B12, and ACC live have done in mitigating COVID-19 spread. Since schools have given up on attempting to isolate players, the odds may be worse than 5%.

So, here’s the calculation:

95% chance in being named in a $500+ million dollar lawsuit and likely settling for $250+ million or 5% chance in pulling off the season with zero COVID-19 infections and maintaining existing revenues until contracts expire and renegotiating for bigger afterward.

If there’s spread AND any of the 40ish schools in those three conferences even attempt to pull a csu style cover-up, all of the odds above goes out the window and guarantee major damages for that school and conference for double or triple the amounts.
 
BUFFS14 said:
If other conferences play, and pull this off with little to no real issues or outbreaks,( I doubt this happens, but for sake of the argument) dues this just prove the ineptitude of the PAC12 leadership and damage the Pac12 even more? We are already behind every other P5 conference in money, and now getting a loan to make up for some lost revenue, just puts us more behind.
Click to expand...
If that happens, I would say yes. Everyone would get to second guess the decision, with the benefit of hindsight, and it would make the P12 look more second class.
 
I saw a quote from some school administrator a few days ago that resonated with me. He said (paraphrasing) “I’d rather be criticized for doing too much when less was required than doing too little when more was required”. At this point, we still don’t know exactly what is “required”, so being overly cautious is probably not a bad plan.

I will say this: the numbers in Colorado took a brief spike in July but are going back down again. Death numbers haven’t changed much at all since June and are pretty close to zero. TIFWIW.
 
I agree with this in principle but we also have to admit there is a cost to over-reaction in either direction. Don’t do enough and lots of people get sick at a minimum and possibly die (though mortality seems to be declining. It’s all so fluid that it’s tough to make any of these calls). Do too much and you needlessly impact futures of athletes, possibly get some injured or hurt back home etc etc (all the theoretical costs that are impossible to prove but we’ve seen unexpected costs of what most now consider an overreaction in the broader economy).

so it’s a matter of degreesand opinions clearly vary a lot on where the right balance is.
 
The timing still hasn't been addressed, which is an issue. What was so pressing that BIG and Pac 12 just had to make the decision yesterday?
 
Buffs35 said:
Dorrell said CU is "on the aggressive side", AD has had discussions about playing outside of conference, but would need blessing of Pac. Said he has not been in the meetings, however. Obviously just posturing, but interesting he would say it publicly.

Interviewed on Full Ride, ESPNU with Slick Rick.
Click to expand...
Whoa. Careful.
 
manhattanbuf said:
The answer to your direct question is yes.

The probability of the other conferences avoiding an outbreak is at best 5% given the horrific job most of the states where the $EC, B12, and ACC live have done in mitigating COVID-19 spread. Since schools have given up on attempting to isolate players, the odds may be worse than 5%.

So, here’s the calculation:

95% chance in being named in a $500+ million dollar lawsuit and likely settling for $250+ million or 5% chance in pulling off the season with zero COVID-19 infections and maintaining existing revenues until contracts expire and renegotiating for bigger afterward.

If there’s spread AND any of the 40ish schools in those three conferences even attempt to pull a csu style cover-up, all of the odds above goes out the window and guarantee major damages for that school and conference for double or triple the amounts.
Click to expand...
After numerous testing days at zero, ND reported positives today. Students returned Monday.
 
LaserDeathHawk said:
I agree with this in principle but we also have to admit there is a cost to over-reaction in either direction. Don’t do enough and lots of people get sick at a minimum and possibly die (though mortality seems to be declining. It’s all so fluid that it’s tough to make any of these calls). Do too much and you needlessly impact futures of athletes, possibly get some injured or hurt back home etc etc (all the theoretical costs that are impossible to prove but we’ve seen unexpected costs of what most now consider an overreaction in the broader economy).

so it’s a matter of degreesand opinions clearly vary a lot on where the right balance is.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. It’s a balancing act. There are consequences for doing too much and for doing too little. The trick is finding that elusive happy medium. I don’t think anybody knows where that is.
 
Darth Snow said:
Click to expand...

The money shot:

“But for those pressing forward to play, heed one warning: The lawyers will be circling. Not the ones counseling conferences to avoid trifling with players’ health, but the ones who will be doing the suing if, God forbid, a player dies, has long-term damage or career-threatening complications. In an email to Sports Illustrated, prominent college sports attorney Tom Mars offered this chilling view of what the Big 12, ACC and SEC could be getting into:

‘Whatever conference(s) decides to play football this fall will be taking a ridiculously high risk they may soon regret. I know and have talked with some of the best plaintiff’s lawyers in the country this week, and they’re praying the SEC, Big 12 and/or the ACC are greedy enough to stay the course. If things go sideways, the plaintiff’s Bar will immediately get their hands on the internal financial analyses of the schools (a FOIA layup), get the conference financials through the discovery process, and then just stand in front of the jurors and point to the conferences that decided not to risk the health of their student-athletes. Good Lord, I’d hate to be the lawyers defending those cases.’

And the attorneys lining up to represent plaintiffs? “These are lawyers who’ve already slain bigger dragons than the SEC, and they can afford to finance the most expensive litigation on the planet. As a coalition, they’d be the legal equivalent of the Death Star.”
 
manhattanbuf said:
The money shot:

“But for those pressing forward to play, heed one warning: The lawyers will be circling. Not the ones counseling conferences to avoid trifling with players’ health, but the ones who will be doing the suing if, God forbid, a player dies, has long-term damage or career-threatening complications. In an email to Sports Illustrated, prominent college sports attorney Tom Mars offered this chilling view of what the Big 12, ACC and SEC could be getting into:

‘Whatever conference(s) decides to play football this fall will be taking a ridiculously high risk they may soon regret. I know and have talked with some of the best plaintiff’s lawyers in the country this week, and they’re praying the SEC, Big 12 and/or the ACC are greedy enough to stay the course. If things go sideways, the plaintiff’s Bar will immediately get their hands on the internal financial analyses of the schools (a FOIA layup), get the conference financials through the discovery process, and then just stand in front of the jurors and point to the conferences that decided not to risk the health of their student-athletes. Good Lord, I’d hate to be the lawyers defending those cases.’

And the attorneys lining up to represent plaintiffs? “These are lawyers who’ve already slain bigger dragons than the SEC, and they can afford to finance the most expensive litigation on the planet. As a coalition, they’d be the legal equivalent of the Death Star.”
Click to expand...

You don't think those same lawyers are thinking about coming hard after the institutions of the four leagues who aren't playing if we see an uptick in concussions in 2021 in the Pac 12, Big 10, MAC, and MWC? Forcing kids to play 20-22 football games in one calendar is a risk too.

We better hope for the sake of this university that we all love that the attempts to play go really, really ****ing sideways. If those three leagues pull this off without major hitches, the Pac 12 is finished.
 
ahoelsken said:
So let me see if I have this right, Snow: Its Donald Trump's fault that the Pac 12 conference can't find rapid, reliable testing..........despite the MLB, NHL, and NBA (all three of whom probably aren't playing without it) being able to? Do I have that right?
Click to expand...
Your personal animosity and childishness aside, answer this question: why is it that the president and pro leagues can get access to quick, voluminous testing on demand while the rest of us can't?
 
Darth Snow said:
Your personal animosity and childishness aside, answer this question: why is it that the president and pro leagues can get access to quick, voluminous testing on demand while the rest of us can't?
Click to expand...

You're a ****ing child. The rest of us? My Uncle was symptomatic in late June, went to Kaiser, got a test, and got a negative result in three hours.

MLB converted a PED lab and signed two other deals with two companies in Texas for antigen testing. Why couldn't Larry get something like that done? I have ZERO problem with pro sports getting tested ahead of me. I don't know about you-but if you give me content like an Avalanche, Nuggets, or baseball game in a made for TV setting like they all are, I'll gladly stay home and watch-which in turn reduces my exposure to whatever COVID-19 is in my neighborhood (and keeps my family safe as a result).
 
Last edited:
TSchekler said:
The timing still hasn't been addressed, which is an issue. What was so pressing that BIG and Pac 12 just had to make the decision yesterday?
Click to expand...
The basketball coach is asking the same thing. I am surprised no one asked this on the conference call and honestly I don't think they have a good answer.
 
ahoelsken said:
You're a ****ing child. The rest of us? My Uncle was symptomatic in late June, went to Kaiser, got a test, and got a negative result in three hours.

MLB converted a PED lab and signed two other deals with two companies in Texas for antigen testing. Why couldn't Larry get something like that done? I have ZERO problem with pro sports getting tested ahead of me. I don't know about you-but if you give me content like an Avalanche, Nuggets, or baseball game in a made for TV setting like they all are, I'll gladly stay home and watch-which in turn reduces my exposure to whatever COVID-19 is in my neighborhood (and keeps my family safe as a result).
Click to expand...
I see you touching on the issue and making demands about it, but not actually thinking about the issue. You aren't making yourself look good here. Maybe relax a bit?

Anyway, it really is a shame that our country hasn't gotten around to making testing easy, quick, reasonably cheap, and widespread relative to our population while also getting the infection rate down to a level where it is safe to engage in things like sports that require travel across the country.

But until that happens, **** sucks and we have to deal with it. Since you have refused to do the thinking, I will lead you through it.

In our environment, pro sports are able to go forward with bubbles (no travel), no fans, and voluminous testing with quick results. Europe's environment was different, so they were able to go forward with no fans and voluminous testing.

College sports can only do no fans. Can't do a bubble (Students - heh). This leads to consequences regarding testing.
College sports are more vulnerable to infection since there is no bubble, so they need even more voluminous testing than pro sports. And it means they have a a stricter or additional requirement than pro sports: they need testing to come back very quickly or else they risk widespread infection within teams or between teams.

Due to cost and availability, they can't meet either requirement. So, no college sports.

Why don't we have quick testing at a reasonable cost? The capability is there. We know this because the guy with the nuclear codes makes sure everyone who comes near him gets that testing. But we don't.

That's not the Pac 12's fault.
 
ahoelsken said:
BTW-Am I the only one who thinks the Pac 12 networks may fold as a result of this?
Click to expand...

After you brought this up, I can see that happening since those third tier rights can be sold for money to soften the blow that the AD budgets are receiving.
 
Duff Man said:
I still think the odds the other conferences play a single game this season are not good at all. They are trying to buy time which will not make much difference in the end.
Click to expand...
Clean Undies said:
My read on the B12 decision is cynical. Sell tickets up until the cancellation announcement. Keep that cash flow coming.

Reminds me of waiting at the gate for Spirit Airlines, with PA announcements peddling hope to the passengers, even though no spare part is going to arrive anytime soon.
Click to expand...
Think Duff is spot on with this. It isn't going to take much time with students back on campus and having 100+ young men in close contact every day in the football facility and being young men away from the team before they start seeing positive test coming in.

With the SEC and a number of ACC and B12 schools and some others protesting their conference decisions we are talking about schools where the football program is a part of the state culture, where the football program has a school attached rather than the school having a football program.

The schools have donors who give millions a year who live and die for their Saturdays. These athletic directors want to do everything they can to convince these donors that taking away their great pleasure in life was only done when no other options existed.

We aren't going to have any magic solutions to the pandemic show up in the next 3 months much less the next 3-4 weeks.

A lot of fans are trying to justify playing with some statistical manipulation saying that we are closing things down when "only" one player is likely to die and since these guys are young not many will get seriously sick.

The schools have to consider being the school who has a kid die because the coaches told him to be at practice and to play, the schools have to consider the the judgement of the court when the jury is told that this once promising player now has heart damage or lung damage and will be limited the rest of his life.

As a fan I'm not even considering the legal liability. I love college football but not enough that I am willing to put peoples lives at risk for it even if it is "just a few."

Try to tell the parents and the girlfriend and the rest of his loved ones of the kid or kids we lose or damage that it's fine because we all got to watch our football games this year.

I know if it were my kid I wouldn't consider that a valid justification.
 
ahoelsken said:
You don't think those same lawyers are thinking about coming hard after the institutions of the four leagues who aren't playing if we see an uptick in concussions in 2021 in the Pac 12, Big 10, MAC, and MWC? Forcing kids to play 20-22 football games in one calendar is a risk too.

We better hope for the sake of this university that we all love that the attempts to play go really, really ****ing sideways. If those three leagues pull this off without major hitches, the Pac 12 is finished.
Click to expand...
I’ve already handicapped this risk. The end of the P12 and the other leagues running outbreak free is about as likely as Colorado winning the PAC-12 title in 2021.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top