FB: Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[OzJohnnie]

Schools are pretty nervous about tort liability, for sure, but to win a tort case the plaintiff must prove that a specific action caused the injury.  That hurdle should prove impossible to overcome with a virus in general circulation.  That's why we don't see successful actions for students catching the flu.  Of course, who wants to be the guinea pig?  Better to avoid the hazy world of negligence tort and deny students opportunity.

I do not look forward to the loneliness and suicide torts which will be tried when on-line schooling runs well into 18 months for some schools.

[Retired Old Rat]

Big Ten commissioner Kevin Warren on BTN was pretty honest about what could happen with COVID-19 pandemic: "We may not have sports in the fall. We may not have a college football season in the Big Ten." Reducing to conf. games was "logical first step" to saving the fall season.

[wally_wabash]

Some talk of the Big Ten moving to conference only football games. Thinking appears to be that at least Big Ten Schools can afford to test players every day but a smaller non conference opponent can't afford frequent testing so the risks of picking up the virus during a game with a school from a different part of the US (and passing it along to another conference opponent) are not worth the extra revenue. Actually the smaller school/opponent also make a ton of $ for playing a game like that and they are going to be hit hard financially. Maybe the conferences in D3 that can afford frequent testing of players will play ball within their conference/region this fall.

It is about generating revenue and avoiding liability if you ask me.

Those tests are $100 a "pop." Since the test only shows results for that specific day, indeed, you can imagine how much frequent testing that will be required is going to cost. Moreover, depending on the availability of how fast the tests results can be returned (in some situations, that could be two days), that will be an effect that will have to be factored in as well. Schools will need to have the rapid test (that which provides the results within 10 minutes) available for game days to test the game officials, sideline personnel, chain marker crew, etc. Add to that the cost of the "temperature guns." I can see this being a real challenge (to say it nicely) for schools at all divisions, yet particularly for those in our DIII, even if playing only the shortened schedules.  This could all "blow up" very easily. 

Edited for typos.

I don't think this cost is getting enough screen time.  I took a not-so-random sampling of four D3 schools (none of which I believe are in imminent danger of insolvency, so kind of a best case scenario deal) and their 2018 football expenses.  Those schools spent between $680,000 and $1.7 million on football in 2018.  (That disparity in expenses is another conversation for another time!)  If a D3 football program needs to test 100 people (players + staff...and this is a conservative estimate- many D3s carry much more than 100 players) three times per week at an estimated cost of $100/test, programs are looking at $30,000 per week.  Let's say there's 14 weeks of activity (training camp + competition weeks), that's $420,000 of extra expense for the season.  Maybe you can get away with testing twice a week.  You're still taking on an extra $280,000 of expense.  Even well-heeled institutions are looking at, at least, 20% increases in expenses- just for testing.  That's nothing of extra equipment, products, staff, etc. that you might need to operate. 

I also located some expense data for some of the D3's that operate much leaner than my first group of four.  This group has total reported football expenses ranging from about $89,000 (!!) to $460,000.  COVID-19 testing on the scale, even like the barest minimum needed, to operate a football program for this group (and I think that the fat part of the distribution curve in D3 is closer to this group than the first) is a dealbreaker. 

[OzJohnnie]

Why do football programs need to test regularly?  Does the concert band?  What about the dance teams?  What about the local concrete mixing plant?

It's a genuine question.  Why are some activities burdened with a testing requirement?  Other than its profile what demonstrable covid risk does a football program create over life in general where people are going to parties, meeting up for independent exercises and other activities?  I'm really struggling to see how it is close to possible to demonstrate that organised sport adds to the risk of infection in any appreciable way over the activities an individual already chooses to enjoy.  Obviously, I can recognise HOW football can contribute to the risk of infection (putting aside the actual consequences, or lack thereof, to the people we're talking about here) but what I cannot see is any evidence that the HOW which is clearly seen actually DOES increase the odds for football players.  In other words, what actual evidence exists that football playing students (or any organised activity for that matter) undertake a Covid risk any different than that of a non-football playing student?

I don't think there is any.  I'll put a serious effort into finding it but I doubt I'll actually locate some.  I think the actual concern here is that institutions have no idea where a court action will lead in the absence of precedent (and even then can be tricky with hazy negligence tort).

[OldAuggie]

Why do football programs need to test regularly?  Does the concert band?  What about the dance teams?  What about the local concrete mixing plant?

It's a genuine question.  Why are some activities burdened with a testing requirement?  Other than its profile what demonstrable covid risk does a football program create over life in general where people are going to parties, meeting up for independent exercises and other activities?  I'm really struggling to see how it is close to possible to demonstrate that organised sport adds to the risk of infection in any appreciable way over the activities an individual already chooses to enjoy.  Obviously, I can recognise HOW football can contribute to the risk of infection (putting aside the actual consequences, or lack thereof, to the people we're talking about here) but what I cannot see is any evidence that the HOW which is clearly seen actually DOES increase the odds for football players.  In other words, what actual evidence exists that football playing students (or any organised activity for that matter) undertake a Covid risk any different than that of a non-football playing student?

I don't think there is any.  I'll put a serious effort into finding it but I doubt I'll actually locate some. I think the actual concern here is that institutions have no idea where a court action will lead in the absence of precedent (and even then can be tricky with hazy negligence tort).

I agree it is all about liability. Schools are ultra cautious and they probably should be.

[miac952]

Big Ten commissioner Kevin Warren on BTN was pretty honest about what could happen with COVID-19 pandemic: "We may not have sports in the fall. We may not have a college football season in the Big Ten." Reducing to conf. games was "logical first step" to saving the fall season.

If it hits a football team, it moves through quickly as evidence by Clemson and Texas, where it went from a couple cases to 30 something in two weeks time. And that was during non contact off-season workouts. The challenge will be if that happens during the season. Clemson and Texas are actually pretty well situated with more than half of their team likely having at least short term immunity at this point.

We are a week in to competition for our kids youth sports and my son has a kid on his Travel baseball team with a fever that we are anxiously awaiting results on. If positive, it shuts the team down for two weeks, which is a 1/3 of the game season at this point. Two girls in our daughters dance studio are positive, shutting that down for two weeks. And my sons basketball camp at the high school is shut down due to a a few positive tests. There is tremendous fragility to youth and college sports. It felt great to have the kids back with activities and some normalcy, but I am realizing it doesn't take much for things to go haywire, and we will be living in this state of upheaval for some time, which is really unnerving.

[jamtod]

Big Ten commissioner Kevin Warren on BTN was pretty honest about what could happen with COVID-19 pandemic: "We may not have sports in the fall. We may not have a college football season in the Big Ten." Reducing to conf. games was "logical first step" to saving the fall season.

If it hits a football team, it moves through quickly as evidence by Clemson and Texas, where it went from a couple cases to 30 something in two weeks time. And that was during non contact off-season workouts. The challenge will be if that happens during the season. Clemson and Texas are actually pretty well situated with more than half of their team likely having at least short term immunity at this point.

We are a week in to competition for our kids youth sports and my son has a kid on his Travel baseball team with a fever that we are anxiously awaiting results on. If positive, it shuts the team down for two weeks, which is a 1/3 of the game season at this point. Two girls in our daughters dance studio are positive, shutting that down for two weeks. And my sons basketball camp at the high school is shut down due to a a few positive tests. There is tremendous fragility to youth and college sports. It felt great to have the kids back with activities and some normalcy, but I am realizing it doesn't take much for things to go haywire, and we will be living in this state of upheaval for some time, which is really unnerving.

There's nothing special about football aside from the $ involved in big-time football which allows the type of testing to preserve it
But the same sorts of precautions (leading to cancellations) are happening for any college sport or activity that involves:
* Off-campus travel
* Direct contact with people outside the school, whether other athletes or whoever

With scheduling adjustments (not returning after Thanksgiving) and such, we are seeing efforts made to limit the amount of students leaving what might be considered the campus bubble. Sports is a major component of that.

[faunch]

One or two nights at the bars or parties will shut everything down.
College towns will not be able to regulate student behavior.

[GoldandBlueBU]

One or two nights at the bars or parties will shut everything down.
College towns will not be able to regulate student behavior.

Tend to agree.  As much as I hope I'm wrong, and they find a way for things to work, I've come to believe that it is unlikely we'll see football this fall for more than a month, if at all...

[MadRedFan]

In news contrary to the shutdown direction, the MIAA has published its football schedule for this year.  Conference games only, of course, but game on for a nine-game season.  I still think the MIAC will be on for conference football.  I can feel the vibe.  If Michiganders can bring themselves to play then anyone can.

https://www.miaa.org/general/2019-20/releases/MIAA_Fall_2020_Schedules_Announced

I wonder if some schools will opt out from the MIAC, but perhaps the MIAC as a conference won't cancel?

I hope this hasn't been posted here, which would make me look dumb and inattentive, but found this on today's footballscoop.com:

Carleton (D-III – MN): Carleton College will not be competing in games this fall. However, the program will still be hiring its open full-time coach / recruiting coordinator position. Minority candidates are encouraged to apply. Interested candidates should apply here: https://jobs.carleton.edu/postings/4678

https://footballscoop.com/the-scoop/

[Pat Coleman]

The school hasn't made any such announcement, but I wouldn't be surprised.

[GoldandBlueBU]

In news contrary to the shutdown direction, the MIAA has published its football schedule for this year.  Conference games only, of course, but game on for a nine-game season.  I still think the MIAC will be on for conference football.  I can feel the vibe.  If Michiganders can bring themselves to play then anyone can.

https://www.miaa.org/general/2019-20/releases/MIAA_Fall_2020_Schedules_Announced

I wonder if some schools will opt out from the MIAC, but perhaps the MIAC as a conference won't cancel?

I hope this hasn't been posted here, which would make me look dumb and inattentive, but found this on today's footballscoop.com:

Carleton (D-III – MN): Carleton College will not be competing in games this fall. However, the program will still be hiring its open full-time coach / recruiting coordinator position. Minority candidates are encouraged to apply. Interested candidates should apply here: https://jobs.carleton.edu/postings/4678

https://footballscoop.com/the-scoop/

I don't see that note in the link anymore?

Maybe someone was posting that before it was supposed to be public?

[Pat Coleman]

The version of The Scoop which loads for me still says that.

[GoldandBlueBU]

The version of The Scoop which loads for me still says that.

Interesting.  Yeah, the link on the Carleton site does not make mention of the fall season being cancelled.

[jknezek]

The version of The Scoop which loads for me still says that.

Ooh... Someone is going to get such a talking to about this. I don't envy them...