In your view, what assumptions/speculation should we attempt to err on the side of? The way I see it, we are operating on maybes and ifs regardless of what direction we choose to go. If there are a lot of unknowns and a lot of coulds and maybes, as there are in this case, then you have to decide... slow down or shut down the economy on the basis of the hypotheses that the disease will be bad, or go with the maybes that suggest things will be okay if we go with business as usual? I'd rather err on the side of taking the disease too seriously. But, then again, I'm in a favorable economic position to weather this storm and I have an immunocompromised significant other so the choice is pretty clear to me. My brother and his healthier side of the family who work in the restaurant business disagree with me. But, whether he wants to call it a hypothesis or you wanna call it speculation is fine. I call it a possibility.
Edit: my bad. just realized we had a new thread. apologies for the bump.
This *could* kill more people and we *might* reduce that risk by canceling large gatherings. Thus, the situation we find ourselves in.
I never claimed to read good. I did overlook that though -- must've skipped down to the tweet that said "PAC" and let my anti-SEC bias kick in.
My understanding is Covid19 has twice the RO (2.8 vs. 1.3 I think) as Flu and is also easier to contain with quarantine. Seems unreasonable to compare the overall numbers while ignoring the potential of this outbreak.
Beautifully descriptive. My soul is similarly butt fucked.
And I didn't even know souls had butts.
So the SEC is going to use this virus for another advantage unless the NCAA follows the PAC and OSU lead? Im not trying to downplay the severity of this situation overall, BUT that still sucks for competitive reasons.
OMG, is this really a thing that happened. Sounds like a train wreck.
Are those real numbers? If so, people in Indiana suck at eating and driving.
The problem is that the facts are unknown. Our system doesn't react well to known unknowns.
liability, primarily, and, secondarily, institutions taking the lead is smart even if some choose not to follow.
My private school is likely closing if the virus reaches our area. Here's why: Kids may contract and carry the virus with few symptoms (we don't know for sure, but we can't rule this out yet - seems healthy kids are unaffected but may carry the virus). We've got a lot of grandparents in our community. If the kids pass it to each other at school after local health authorities sound the alarm and a few grandparents become seriously ill as kids unknowingly bring it home, that's a huge issue. As a result, we're doing professional development on running a digital classroom to use if/when local authorities sound the alarm. It may seem overly cautious (it is), but it sets a standard in the community that we should be careful and prevents the disease from passing to hundreds in our halls (we aren't responsible for how children interact beyond our walls). Besides, there's unlikely to be that high a concentration of children anywhere outside of school so the move may reduce the spread.
It's also about the unknowns here. How far can it spread? We don't know. And the logic of "well, probably not far enough so let's continue with business as usual" seems poor. Once we get a handle on it, we'll return to business as usual. Personally, I think it's the right move for my school at least and we're putting the just on case plan in place.
Did they quarantine and shut stuff down in Wuhan or did they just continue with business as usual? Because if they've reached 0 after a few months, we should probably do whatever they did to reach that in the event the virus begins spreading in one of our communities.
No no no, the problem is definitely us...
To be honest, your first post sounded like a disgusting Michigan fan getting excited that a rape may generate a roster weakness and seemed to deserve downvotes. This shows where you're coming from better. But follow your own advice with your "holier than thou" crap... The fact that your failure to fully explain yourself the first time made you come off to some as insensitive isn't their fault and doesn't make them "crazies" necessarily
Exactly. Given that context combined with the fact that Urban had 2 extra months (until February), I'd grade Day's as the more impressive haul relative to expected results.
Comparing a 1st year head coach's 1st recruiting class to an established national champ's on a triumphant 12-0 return (with extra months due to old recruiting calendar to seal players like Vonn Bell) makes me less skeptical.
0 from the southeast? If we can get the best from our area and poach the west coast and win natty's with 0 southeastern players, I'm gonna troll SEC folk so hard on Twitter.
DEFENSE BABAY!!!!! BOOOOOM
I like the approach to OLine recruiting - a few highly rated guys and several projects for Mick and Stud to sculpt. Only some need to be masterpieces (and certainly some will be). Those that aren't will still get developed at a top notch program and can either transfer for PT or provide quality depth with their loyalty. I think that's a powerful recipe.
Best of luck to Leroux on his journey to being the next masterpiece!
They won't need to take the bus, he can just carry the class to the park for the field trip.
But from a legal standpoint the act of throwing a baseball into the stands would seem to indicate an initial act of physical aggression.
What's different about this situation would be the Kansas player only attacked someone who shoved him first. Now... had he thrown that stool, maybe a different story. But, I still think it is a stretch even when compared to this baseball story.
So the advice is to hide in some shrubbery?
So he wouldn't have been allowed in our country if he had accepted an offer to play for a non-cheating school? The only reason he is here is because he cheats - otherwise not good enough for a college basketball scholarship at any level? Well, then, send him back to Angola or hire him onto the Patriots staff I guess are the only two options.
It is a fair point - I'm just trying to take my best crack at explaining it since you asked. Perhaps, additionally, by bringing up the word deportation, it points toward a hot button issue which could then be viewed as forbidden by the commenting policy.
But, hey, people are sensitive on here... Hell, I apparently took -1 for giving your question an attempt at an answer... Now if these helmet stickers ever gain value for trade and I end up 1 HS short of a trip to Paris or some shit, my girl's gonna be pissed!
Some may consider calling for deportation over a courtside brawl in a rivalry game extreme. Although he clearly deserves suspended, I believe he did not make physical contact with anyone who didn't swing at him first as he was going after the dude who came flying off the bench to shove him. Explain to me why it would be reasonable to deport a student athlete who migrated from Angola under these circumstances.