MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[Titan Q]

I can only speak to what I've seen and heard, but the student-athletes, coaches, and support staff at North Park are immensely grateful for the opportunities that they've already had to take part in 2021 Vikings athletic contests. NPU has to date played two men's basketball games, two women's basketball games, and one men's volleyball match, and, regardless of the scoreboard outcomes of three wins and two losses, all five contests were victories in a very real sense. A lot of people put a lot of work in to make those contests happen, and, against some pretty strong odds, intercollegiate athletics took place at North Park Gymnasium and at Merner Fieldhouse over the past weekend. The atmosphere wasn't exactly celebratory, taking place as it were in gyms with empty stands, masks on everybody (with certain exceptions in the men's basketball games), spread-out benches, and clouds of spray sanitizer floating everywhere ... but everybody present had the satisfaction of being part of both something that they love to do and something that in all of the important ways was a sliver of the normal life we all knew prior to last March.

I can understand why a fan of a school whose similar attempts have been thwarted thus far by positive Covid-19 tests would throw up his hands and say, "Good try, but at this point it is hard to see how this was a good decision to try." But in response, I say: Ask a student-athlete from your alma mater how he or she feels about that. Send texts to Charlie Bair and Kendall Sosa that say, "Good try, but at this point it is hard to see how this was a good decision to try." Be sure to let us know their responses.

All this work that I spoke about that all of these people have put in has not been in vain. When I interviewed the NPU men's volleyball coach on the air after Saturday's match, he was practically in tears when he talked about how much this meant to his players. What CCIW schools, and athletics department personnel in particular, are doing in trying to make these games and matches happen is a good deed -- and good deeds should be encouraged, not dismissed with a wave of the hand because of setbacks here or there or because they're too difficult.

If this were Facebook, I'd hit like, love, and thumbs up.

Me too.

[iwu70]

Gentlemen!   Of course all the players want to play . . . and the coaches too.  I have no doubt about this.  And we the fans would love to see them play, too.  I'm a big fan hoping the games can go on.  But, what happens now if one of the players or coaches (and some coaches have tested positive, no doubt) get truly ill, seriously ill.  We have to face the reality of this serious, sometimes fatal disease . . . and the CCIW has started all this right into the teeth of the pandemic, with new variants likely out there.  I'm sure all those at the University of Michigan wanted to play, worked hard to make it happen too, but you know what they've had to decide.  And, we all know that several of the CCIW schools are hanging on by a thread financially, yet we spend a lot of resources on testing, mitigations etc. OK, all good.  But, we have to admit that it all could go wrong . . . and seemingly has to some degree so far.  Yes, it's going to be "crazy" -- but it could also be ill-advised, even dangerous.  I know many of the IWU players and wish them the best, hope they can play, especially the seniors, but I also don't want them to become seriously ill.  It seems six or so of them, and two coaches are now positive, in isolation, with others in quarantine, waiting to see how the course of the virus plays out.  I don't know how many at Elmhurst. Hopefully they won't be seriously ill . . .  and some games can go on . . . that would be my wish.  But, reality may intervene.  The virus is out there, stubborn . . . and doesn't care if you are a student-athlete, a coach or a fan. 

'70

[Titan Q]

Gentlemen!   Of course all the players want to play . . . and the coaches too.  I have no doubt about this.  And we the fans would love to see them play, too.  I'm a big fan hoping the games can go on.  But, what happens now if one of the players or coaches (and some coaches have tested positive, no doubt) get truly ill, seriously ill.  We have to face the reality of this serious, sometimes fatal disease . . . and the CCIW has started all this right into the teeth of the pandemic, with new variants likely out there.  I'm sure all those at the University of Michigan wanted to play, worked hard to make it happen too, but you know what they've had to decide.  And, we all know that several of the CCIW schools are hanging on by a thread financially, yet we spend a lot of resources on testing, mitigations etc. OK, all good.  But, we have to admit that it all could go wrong . . . and seemingly has to some degree so far.  Yes, it's going to be "crazy" -- but it could also be ill-advised, even dangerous.  I know many of the IWU players and wish them the best, hope they can play, especially the seniors, but I also don't want them to become seriously ill.  It seems six or so of them, and two coaches are now positive, in isolation, with others in quarantine, waiting to see how the course of the virus plays out.  I don't know how many at Elmhurst. Hopefully they won't be seriously ill . . .  and some games can go on . . . that would be my wish.  But, reality may intervene.  The virus is out there, stubborn . . . and doesn't care if you are a student-athlete, a coach or a fan. 

'70

I interpet COVID data differently than you.

But one thing I have learned the last 11 months is that you can't change anyone's mind on how they feel about COVID, and how it should be handled. 

So I'll just leave it as I see things differently.

[Titan Q]

Someone pretty close to things told me about a week ago that probably about 33% of all CCIW WBB/MBB players have had COVID already -- got it either before coming back to campus, or during the Fall.  Many programs had huge outbreaks in the Fall.

There is one program, I believe, that is at 75%+.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Someone pretty close to things told me about a week ago that probably about 33% of all CCIW WBB/MBB players have had COVID already -- got it either before coming back to campus, or during the Fall.  Many programs had huge outbreaks in the Fall.

There is one program, I believe, that is at 75%+.

Of course, it's been long enough now, if they got it in September or earlier, they could absolutely test positive again.

[USee]

The percentages of student athlete getting seriously ill from the virus is statistically insignificant (as in small). And I'd like to see the data that shows that student athletes (staff or coaches) get the virus at a higher rate during season than just being students out of season. I would postulate that the rate is lower in season due to the many precautions and frequent testing. Those in the "don't play" camp are operating out of fear, not science.

[Titan Q]

Hearing this on IWU MBB/WBB COVID situation. Wow...

-Monday am rapid tests produced some positives.

-Lab contacted IWU to say some tests were compromised.

-Players were retested - this time via PCR (not rapid).

-Per PCR, positives were deemed to be false.  The lab has firmly acknowledged the rapid test results were wrong.

But...

-False positive and "close contact" student-athletes are stuck in quarantine due to black & white COVID protocols.

-University is trying to help the student-athletes fight this, but so far rules are considered to be black & white...even though the positives are false.


That is where things stand as we speak.

[Pat Coleman]

The percentages of student athlete getting seriously ill from the virus is statistically insignificant (as in small). And I'd like to see the data that shows that student athletes (staff or coaches) get the virus at a higher rate during season than just being students out of season. I would postulate that the rate is lower in season due to the many precautions and frequent testing. Those in the "don't play" camp are operating out of fear, not science.

I am firmly in the "play" camp but even so, I would characterize the "don't play" camp as operating from a place of caution, rather than fear.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

The percentages of student athlete getting seriously ill from the virus is statistically insignificant (as in small). And I'd like to see the data that shows that student athletes (staff or coaches) get the virus at a higher rate during season than just being students out of season. I would postulate that the rate is lower in season due to the many precautions and frequent testing. Those in the "don't play" camp are operating out of fear, not science.

I am firmly in the "play" camp but even so, I would characterize the "don't play" camp as operating from a place of caution, rather than fear.

Agreed with Pat - I haven't talked to a single individual at any institution, especially those who have stopped athletics or made tough decisions, and not any of them have any "fear."

The considerations aren't just for the athletes, but the entire campus and the region where universities reside.

- While students might not have a high-probability of falling ill, it does happen and it can be severe - even those who fine physical shape. A friend and former colleague of mine has a son who was a junior (or sophomore) at Tennessee and in the fall semester became sick. He was in the hospital (and at times, if not most of the stay, in the ICU) for over two weeks. He had at least one surgery, but another very invasive one nearly took place to save his life before he finally made a turn for the good. But he went through hell and still needs physical therapy to learn to walk and do simple things again especially since he spent two weeks in a hospital bed (something I can tell you that just a few days will cause your body to lose the ability to simply walk). So while less chance, still significant risk.

- While students might not have a high-probability of falling ill, they can and do transport the virus just like all the rest of us. However, being less likely to be ill or show any signs of illness, they are more likely to spread the virus because they aren't aware they have it. We are all aware of how quickly the flu or other illnesses can spread through a campus nearly ever academic year - and this virus can pass on to others far faster and easier than the flu. There are professors, administrators, coaches, staff, and everyone else on campuses who are at a higher risk than the students simply by being older. The students could inadvertently pass the virus on to those individuals and now the health and safety of individuals that make the college work (teaching to cleaning and everything in between) could be at risk - and thus the college itself.

- While students might not have a high-probability of falling ill, we all know most college students aren't as responsible as older adults. They make decisions that aren't as safe and with less care for what it might do to themselves. If they leave campus, they can help spread the virus, unknowingly, to the local community where ever they may visit or spend time. That risk leads to below...

- And while students might not have a high-probability of falling ill, local communities where many of these universities are located don't have the resources or the hospital beds to handle a large outbreak in their communities alone, not to mention if the college added to the numbers. I have been told of several instanced of colleges being told by the local officials that either rising numbers on campus, in the community, or the concern for either was not something that community was willing to risk and students were sent home. Sometimes the risk is too much for where colleges are located than just for the college itself.

Now add in the aspect of allowing students to travel to a campus the president doesn't have any control over, or allow students from another campus come on to that president's campus. You put all these systems in place to make sure the campus even has students on it and now add in the unknown of what is outside the system. It is a huge risk.

These are just some of the examples given to me since last spring when the decision about having campuses open or closed in the short or long term was being discussed at colleges all over this country. Presidents have to weigh all these risks against the financial future of their institutions. They have to weight whether they can even contain a rise in numbers in the first place or if the relationship with their communities would allow it. Some of these decisions could very well sink an institution and force it to close in the immediate future (some institutions were already headed there and closures would be happening whether the virus hit or not, but that is a different topic). Certainly an outbreak of the virus could also doom an institution (in lawsuits, in reputation, etc., etc., etc.).

No one wants to not have students on campus because not only is it the soul of a campus that makes each college unique and special, but it also is the guarunteed life-blood that institutions need to survive. But everyone also wants a college or university to return to in the future.

There isn't anyone making these decisions in fear. They are trying to make the best decision for the students attending (and paying) the institution, the staff/faculty of the institution, alumni, parents, and countless others while understanding we are dealing with something simply unknown.

I wouldn't want to be a president or an administrator - to quote something I read today, "there hasn't been an off-switch" to any of this in nearly a year for anyone.

Considering there are even teams playing right now, we should be thankful and not taking shots at those who made difficult decisions because they felt the risk was too high for their institution and it's future.

Sorry - it bugs me, no matter how the "data" is "read" that people can't understand this isn't easy and think decisions are made in fear.

[kiko]

FWIW, I am firmly in the 'don't play' camp.  I get the desire to play and it is heartbreaking to see so much taken away from so many -- and that gauntlet runs from those losing a normal college experience (or elementary school, or high school, or...) to those who can no longer speak for themselves having lost much more.  And I think one thing everyone can agree with is that we all want normal back as quickly as possible.

Half-measures that facilitate a sense of normalcy are generally not going to navigate us out of this.  We seem to keep learning that lesson without ever really learning that lesson.

[USee]

There are literally hundreds of colleges and universities playing sports and facing the same issues. They have figured it out. Its not without risk, but the risk of playing has not been proven to be more than the risk for these players and staff of not playing. In fact, with all the protocols (see Q's post) it's pretty clear these players are far more careful in season than out of season.

And I'm pretty sure visiting teams are not wandering around campus putting other President's students at risk. That's the type of fear based comments that keeps people from looking at facts and analyzing the actual risks. I have no problem with schools that aren't playing and staying consistent with their treatment of all students. I just don't see any evidence playing is more risky than not playing.

[WUPHF]

Y'all been away from college for too long.

It is not as if college students are locking themselves in their dorm rooms and only the athletes are out and about.

Inviting students back to campus...that is the risk.

Adding in limited interactions between 10-20 students that are regularly tested...across a few teams.  10-20 students that have a greater incentive than anyone else on campus to stay in the bubble, to stay socially distant, to wear the mask...

Statistically insignificant is an understatement.

[WUPHF]

There are literally hundreds of colleges and universities playing sports and facing the same issues. They have figured it out. Its not without risk, but the risk of playing has not been proven to be more than the risk for these players and staff of not playing. In fact, with all the protocols (see Q's post) it's pretty clear these players are far more careful in season than out of season.

And I'm pretty sure visiting teams are not wandering around campus putting other President's students at risk. That's the type of fear based comments that keeps people from looking at facts and analyzing the actual risks. I have no problem with schools that aren't playing and staying consistent with their treatment of all students. I just don't see any evidence playing is more risky than not playing.

Preach!

[kiko]

I'm not going to argue this in-depth on a basketball board as there is clearly no consensus on what the best path forward is.  But if you think those who are advocating for a more restrained approach are doing so out of fear, you are badly mistaken.

[Titan Q]

There are literally hundreds of colleges and universities playing sports and facing the same issues. They have figured it out. Its not without risk, but the risk of playing has not been proven to be more than the risk for these players and staff of not playing. In fact, with all the protocols (see Q's post) it's pretty clear these players are far more careful in season than out of season.

Y'all been away from college for too long.

It is not as if college students are locking themselves in their dorm rooms and only the athletes are out and about.

Inviting students back to campus...that is the risk.

Adding in limited interactions between 10-20 students that are regularly tested...across a few teams.  10-20 students that have a greater incentive than anyone else on campus to stay in the bubble, to stay socially distant, to wear the mask...

Statistically insignificant is an understatement.

The above comments summarize my feelings very well. 

Consider these tweets recently:

* "As a coach I used to sometimes get a little anxious the couple of hours leading up to tip.   Now I only get anxious waiting for test results.  Everything after that is cake." - Damion Jablonski (Head MBB Coach, Whitworth)
https://twitter.com/HoopsCoachJ/status/1354162747802443776?s=20

* "Last night we rapid tested AT Northern Iowa less than 3 hours before tip then sat on our bus awaiting the results. Longest 30 minutes of my life." - Paxton Molinari (Asst MBB Coach, Coe)
https://twitter.com/CoeCoachMo/status/1354165190741385217?s=20


Stop and think a second about the protocols student-athletes are required to follow and, more importantly, the incredible amount of incentive they have to not contract the virus.  They are accountable multiple times per week for testing negative.  If they are positive, they feel like they've let their entire team and school down.  No other student on campus has that level of COVID accountability...not even close.

It forces student-athletes to follow all of the COVID guidelines - the masks, social distancing, etc.  Here is how Ron Rose described the life of his players right now:

* "You're living in a dormitory..you're going to class...you're going to the cafeteria to eat." [12:00]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2YUg9QvsqM&t=5s

Outside of practice and games, that is what college student-athletes do right now on campus.  No social gatherings, no going out to a restaurant, etc, etc.  Because they have to test negative multiples times per week.  "We are asking them to sacrifice" as Rose said.

Think of the fear of this:

* Student-athletes (SAs) who are positive are shut down for 10 days.

* SAs who are "close contact negative" (example - roommate) are out 14 days.  (Essentially, as I understand it, they are presumed positive.)

Think of being the one who causes your team to have to postpone a game.

Do we think all other college students are following those same rules right now?  Put yourself back on campus and really think about that one.  Does any other student on a campus have more incentive to follow COVID guidelines than a student-athlete?  Does any have the same level of accountability for it?

I guess I don't understand how D3 sports would make a campus community less safe, based on the intense protocols and accountability in place.  Now, if someone suggested they play sports without testing, I'd disagree strongly with that.  An exchange I had on Twitter yesterday:

https://twitter.com/IWUhoopscom/status/1354550433168183299?s=20
@adiosillinois:"We don't test in Indiana unless people have symptoms. That's the common sense approach."

Me: "But we know positive people with no symptoms spread the virus.  Are you saying knowingly spreading the virus is the common sense approach? I don't agree with that."

@adiosillinois: "People at risk should stay home. The rest of us are fine and that includes the asymptomatic ones who feel 100% healthy. We don't go searching for fake problems here and guess what:  it works great as we've proven"

Me: "I think "people at risk should stay home" sounds good, but is not necessarily realistic. I think people have a responsibility to control community spread, as that leads to hospitalizations and deaths (I assume we all now people people in both categories unfortunately)."

It went on.

My point - I am not in the "this is a hoax" crowd, and I very much believe in and support controlling spread of the virus.

But I do not see any logical reason to believe D3 sports are putting campuses or surrounding communities at risk.  As WUPHF said, "Inviting students back to campus...that is the risk." 

"Statistically insignificant is an understatement" -- I agree with that.