Now official no fans at any ncaa games
- Thread starter libertychamp
- Start date
Empty arenas with no sound except the bounce of the ball and the squeak of rubber shoe soles on the hardwood. It will be just like watching an SMU or Tulane game on TV.
Last edited:
All NCAA and NIT games....no fans..(except limited family) ... Could play NIT at BTW High School. No CBI at all. Most conference tournaments still on. Sneaking in will be talked about for years to come. The BOK Center and Tulsa hosts dodged a bullet not having the NCAA this year.
No Smu no Houston no shockers fans no UConn fans no Cincy fans that sounds fair refs can’t call it for fans which wouldn’t be ours probably
They'll LTE 5 mics from all the local bars over the loud speakers.
Just throwing this out there, but the players who realized their life dream of being in the tournament might still be interested in playing. The games first and foremost are about the student athletes (outside the ones getting paid at KU, etc).
I predict the NCAA tournament will be cancelled. Having it players only does nothing to reduce the vectors of infection when players who get exposed return to their university campus, therefore exposing a larger group.
[QUOTE="tulsahurricane0530, post: 291569, member: 752"\]
It's getting ridiculous. Bunch of overreacting going on. Games are going to be
boring to watch. Really dont see the point in playing the games at all if there
wont be fans. Thats part of the appeal[/QUOTE]
Maybe, but maybe not...If all of the restrictions inconvience 1m people, but
saves two lives, it is pretty hard to say that is over regulating....This is territory
we don't know much about, and maybe too much caution is the better part
of valor.....
Let's wait and see.....
It's getting ridiculous. Bunch of overreacting going on. Games are going to be
boring to watch. Really dont see the point in playing the games at all if there
wont be fans. Thats part of the appeal[/QUOTE]
Maybe, but maybe not...If all of the restrictions inconvience 1m people, but
saves two lives, it is pretty hard to say that is over regulating....This is territory
we don't know much about, and maybe too much caution is the better part
of valor.....
Let's wait and see.....
Maybe, but maybe not...If all of the restrictions inconvience 1m people, but
saves two lives, it is pretty hard to say that is over regulating....This is territory
we don't know much about, and maybe too much caution is the better part
of valor.....
Let's wait and see.....[/QUOTE]
Exactly, no matter what, it's just a game , people living is alot more important
Exactly, no matter what, it's just a game , people living is alot more important[/QUOTE]
So should we not drive cars either and go in to quarantine every flu season?
The problem with this mentality is it doesn't take into account the consequence of this hysteria. We are crippling our economy that will be taking a serious hit from supply chain failures in a few months.
The NCAA and NBA generates billions of dollars that are circulated through the economy based on restaurants, hotels, travel, etc. This is short term economic cycle that keeps the economy churning, the interruption of the global supply chain is a longer economic cycle that will be experiencing shortages and slow downs.
All of this for something that won't reasonably change or even slow down the spread of an illness that was present in the US, in early January, long before any precautions were taken. This means the disease is now communicable and should be treated like a very bad flu season and not Ebola.
There are a few promising antiviral treatments in trial right now and hopefully we will see a quick approval and production ramp up.
But until then, a disease with 10x the mortality rate of a seasonal flu, with effective treatments or a vaccine, requires due attention.
I wish we had a more coherent message though as to what to do and why.
As to the tourney attendance, I dont feel like I know enough one way or the other to criticize these actions. No doubt though on the economic risk.
But until then, a disease with 10x the mortality rate of a seasonal flu, with effective treatments or a vaccine, requires due attention.
I wish we had a more coherent message though as to what to do and why.
As to the tourney attendance, I dont feel like I know enough one way or the other to criticize these actions. No doubt though on the economic risk.
First we don't know that. That's a guess largely based on rates from other countries that have similar issues as the US in that the number of infections is unknown, therefore the percentage of people dying is unknown.
The high rate of death is directly related to the age of those we do know who have, in particular in europe where some of the oldest average ages in the world are. The large portion of the less than 40 deaths in the US came from one nursing home.
That 10x is also the high end estimate.
None of this takes into account that the disease is communicable already and none of these measures are likely to slow its spread or "flatten" the curve of such a highly contagious pathogen.
The 10x is the low end, actually. Countries that have slowed the spread and done massive testing programs, like South Korea, are where the death rate is lowest and is showing about 1%. That is about 8x as deadly as the flu. A death rate this low is only achievable if precautions like the cancellation of large events are enacted. The high end occurs when the healthcare systems get overwhelmed because you allowed it to spread exponentially. Then it is something like 4-5%, which might still be high due to the diagnosis bias on the sickest patients, but suffice to say it is worse than 1%. Depending on how we react as a nation/state/city, I would expect a death rate anywhere between 1-4%.
Hold on, do you really think you're the only one who has figured this out? That the people making these decisions don't understand the economic impact of this? Do you think you have better knowledge and information than Adam Silver?
Did you consider the possibility that they might have access to BETTER information than you, people who might be actual experts (I assume you are not) and that their "overreaction" should scare the living $hit out of you? I wasn't all that worried until the NBA moved. Nobody likes their $$ more than the NBA (except the NCAA and NFL of course), so if they're willing to lose potentially billions, then it must be a big deal. How many times has the NBA suspended operations over a sickness before? You think they do it just for fun?
The decisions are a lot harder here because we don't have the slightest clue what the actual infection rate is because testing has been so limited. Korea has drive through testing centers and they've tested 700X more people per million than the US. The lack of information makes these decisions a lot guesswork.
I think this probably has a lot to do with it.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/a...shows-why-social-distancing-works/ar-BB113oWe
The problem is this decision is probabilistic based on poor information - in other words, hard. Do you take strong measures now that you know will cost you $10B if it reduces the odds of a $500B pandemic from 20% to 10%? The expected value of that 10% reduction is $50B, or 5X more than the cost today. Any rational decisionmaker will tell you to do that. The people making these decisions (outside of DC) are smart and rational. They know how to make money. Some people would say, let's roll the dice on that 20% chance. Which is why they aren't in charge (well, mostly).
First no we don't know any of that. One of the biggest issues outside of Korea is the lack of testing.
You say 10x is lower end then quote a number 8x it.
It is too late to contain or stop the spread of a virus that has been floating around for several months.
Panics happen all the time, mostly from people not stopping to think about consequences and actual risk management.
The experts have given us some of the biggest mess ups in history including the depression and the great recession, because they are just guessing. Evidence based decisions work much better.
You say 10x is lower end then quote a number 8x it.
It is too late to contain or stop the spread of a virus that has been floating around for several months.
Panics happen all the time, mostly from people not stopping to think about consequences and actual risk management.
The experts have given us some of the biggest mess ups in history including the depression and the great recession, because they are just guessing. Evidence based decisions work much better.
I said it was the low end, and I quoted you evidence that the death rate is between 8 and 32 times as high as flu. I will stand by my assessment that 10x is the low end.
Experts bet wrong sometimes, but here’s the thing: while we wait for more evidence, better evidence, etc, etc, bodies pile up. We do have some evidence, admittedly incomplete. But we have to act on what we know, not on facts not currently in evidence. By the time we get enough info to satisfy everyone, it might be too late. Is it a gamble? Sure. But it’s one being made by people that have a LOT more at stake than getting to watch their favorite basketball team on TV.
You are probably right that it cannot be stopped at this point. But it can be slowed down, and that is the goal here.
Similar threads
