Covid-19 and College Athletics

[Nidaros]

The story you originally linked to includes a link to this article, which mentions faculty at EWU advocating drop to DII or DIII, while such extreme moves seem highly unlikely, it's telling that the university's own faculty are advocating it, and it seems likely they'd find support among fiscally austere legislators and alumni.

Filbert mentioned distance/online learning as a focal point, and assuming it is, the budget dynamics of those course offerings, reduced room/board, etc. could only exacerbate strife between athletics and academics.

The strife between academics and athletics is the wake up call for all institutions at all levels. Can SDSU have both? I think so if we are careful. I am sure President Dunn is weighing this issue carefully and let us hope for a business as usual day.

[Nidaros]

The story you originally linked to includes a link to this article, which mentions faculty at EWU advocating drop to DII or DIII, while such extreme moves seem highly unlikely, it's telling that the university's own faculty are advocating it, and it seems likely they'd find support among fiscally austere legislators and alumni.

Filbert mentioned distance/online learning as a focal point, and assuming it is, the budget dynamics of those course offerings, reduced room/board, etc. could only exacerbate strife between athletics and academics.

The strife between academics and athletics is the wake up call for all institutions at all levels. Can SDSU have both? I think so if we are careful. I am sure President Dunn is weighing this issue carefully and let us hope for a business as usual day.

[bigticket1]

It's been reported that several Alabama players tested positive when they reported to campus this week.

[jakejc795]

It's been reported that several Alabama players tested positive when they reported to campus this week.

Among the half dozen schools known to reportedly have individuals test positive.

I'd be curious what the ramifications would be if opponents determined that teams on their schedule were testing at reduced frequency, testing smaller samples of athletes/staff, etc. Could those with more robust testing regimens make the case that the upcoming games should be canceled because lax testing puts others at risk?

[bigticket1]

Among the half dozen schools known to reportedly have individuals test positive.

I'd be curious what the ramifications would be if opponents determined that teams on their schedule were testing at reduced frequency, testing smaller samples of athletes/staff, etc. Could those with more robust testing regimens make the case that the upcoming games should be canceled because lax testing puts others at risk?

In the protocol the NBA is using to start their season, if a player tests positive he is quarantined and the rest of the team keeps playing. But they are going to test every player every day. And all the teams and their personnel are basically already quarantined at the Disney complex.

[jakejc795]

In the protocol the NBA is using to start their season, if a player tests positive he is quarantined and the rest of the team keeps playing. But they are going to test every player every day. And all the teams and their personnel are basically already quarantined at the Disney complex.

That's feasible for the NBA, but with universities one has to consider the optics and possible detrimental impact of testing athletes and staff, possibly using university funding, when faculty and students are unlikely to be afforded similar opportunities. The NBA faced controversy earlier in the year when they were testing players while there was a nationwide shortage of tests.

Then, as mentioned previously, you could have some schools/conferences testing more rigorously than others. Lastly, colleges and universities present other risks in the form of commuter students, faculty, and staff who may inadvertently transmit the virus, especially if they do not take steps to mitigate risks.

[bigticket1]

That's feasible for the NBA, but with universities one has to consider the optics and possible detrimental impact of testing athletes and staff, possibly using university funding, when faculty and students are unlikely to be afforded similar opportunities. The NBA faced controversy earlier in the year when they were testing players while there was a nationwide shortage of tests.

Then, as mentioned previously, you could have some schools/conferences testing more rigorously than others. Lastly, colleges and universities present other risks in the form of commuter students, faculty, and staff who may inadvertently transmit the virus, especially if they do not take steps to mitigate risks.

If I was an administrator in charge of bringing 10,000 plus students back to campus in the current environment, I don't think I would be sleeping very well. It sounds like they are trying to keep students on campus more by eliminating the three day weekends, but I think we all know how well that's going to work. Having enough tests available to test everyone when they arrive on campus in August would help, but I doubt that they have that kind of volume available. And then bringing in another 10,000 bodies to campus on game days throws another whole level of risk into the mix.

[jakejc795]

If I was an administrator in charge of bringing 10,000 plus students back to campus in the current environment, I don't think I would be sleeping very well. It sounds like they are trying to keep students on campus more by eliminating the three day weekends, but I think we all know how well that's going to work. Having enough tests available to test everyone when they arrive on campus in August would help, but I doubt that they have that kind of volume available. And then bringing in another 10,000 bodies to campus on game days throws another whole level of risk into the mix.

I agree regarding the lack of sleep.

The logistics involved in testing, maintaining records, and tracking/tracing everyone would be staggering. Plus, there's the matter of determining frequency of subsequent testing and/or isolating classes if/when a student, or students, tests/test positive.

Ending on-campus instruction by Thanksgiving, as they are scheduled to now, seems wise

[jakejc795]

In the protocol the NBA is using to start their season, if a player tests positive he is quarantined and the rest of the team keeps playing. But they are going to test every player every day. And all the teams and their personnel are basically already quarantined at the Disney complex.

Update regarding Jacks' COVID testing regimen (apparently they aren't testing) and possibility that FBS schools may force FCS schools to test with cost deducted from guarantee payout.

[bigticket1]

Update regarding Jacks' COVID testing regimen (apparently they aren't testing) and possibility that FBS schools may force FCS schools to test with cost deducted from guarantee payout.

It seems to me that programs would want to test all of the players and staff when they come back to campus for a couple of reasons. First, so they know where they stand with the virus and can isolate any positives, and can start out with as clean of a slate as possible. And second as a courtesy to the communities where they reside, as the players are going to be circulating around their cities. Spending a few thousand $ should be worth the peace of mind of minimizing the possibility of having a hot spot on their hands a couple of weeks into practice.

[Nidaros]

It seems to me that programs would want to test all of the players and staff when they come back to campus for a couple of reasons. First, so they know where they stand with the virus and can isolate any positives, and can start out with as clean of a slate as possible. And second as a courtesy to the communities where they reside, as the players are going to be circulating around their cities. Spending a few thousand $ should be worth the peace of mind of minimizing the possibility of having a hot spot on their hands a couple of weeks into practice.

Yes I would agree with all said. I disagree strongly with President Trump that more testing lead to more cases , but then I am not running for re-election. I think you can never overtest.

[jakejc795]

It seems to me that programs would want to test all of the players and staff when they come back to campus for a couple of reasons. First, so they know where they stand with the virus and can isolate any positives, and can start out with as clean of a slate as possible. And second as a courtesy to the communities where they reside, as the players are going to be circulating around their cities. Spending a few thousand $ should be worth the peace of mind of minimizing the possibility of having a hot spot on their hands a couple of weeks into practice.

I tend to agree; however, if access to testing at the municipal or county level is an issue, then I could see waiting to test until the season starts, because as we've discussed previously, if athletes and coaches are being tested without similar access to testing for faculty, staff, etc., it could be seen as reflecting poorly on SDSU Athletics' and Admin's priorities.

Reports have indicated the state will continue limiting testing to symptomatic individuals.

Plus, in the absence of any official word (at least that I've seen) on plans for football attendance, news of positive tests now could dampen both interest among fans in attending games and parents sending their kids to Brookings as students in the fall.

[jackdaniel]

it's only common sense.....you test 100 people you get 1 case....you test 1000 people you get 10 (or more)....10>1....science...the more testing, the greater the accuracy of the data.....right?

[jakejc795]

it's only common sense.....you test 100 people you get 1 case....you test 1000 people you get 10 (or more)....10>1....science...the more testing, the greater the accuracy of the data.....right?

Depends on how you deploy the test and the characteristics of individuals sampled. For instance, you could oversample folks abiding by guidelines/less prone to engage in activities that'd have them risk exposure and capture test results that suggest reduced COVID prevalence when in reality the population truly has increased prevalence. Of course, converse could be true as well, which may be more likely in our case, if state limits sample to those exhibiting symptoms.

[Nidaros]

it's only common sense.....you test 100 people you get 1 case....you test 1000 people you get 10 (or more)....10>1....science...the more testing, the greater the accuracy of the data.....right?

Yes I think so. I had a hard time in statistics and was an econ major. Some of that theoretical stuff never made any sense to me. Your sampling in general would fit. As always there are exceptions. Don't ask me about the 95% confidence level. I am done here.