With the Atlantic Sun, Missouri Valley, and Ohio Valley conferences having decided on no Fall sports, here are updated numbers: Total Division I Teams 341 Not Eligible for NCAA Tournament 6 Total Teams Eligible for Tournament 335 50% of Eligible Teams 168 Eligible Teams Not Playing in Fall 262 Additional Not Playing to Equal 50% -95 It now is a matter of which conferences still are playing in the Fall rather than which are not: American (FBS) ACC (FBS) Big 12 (FBS) CUSA (FBS) SEC (FBS) Sun Belt (FBS) These all are conferences with football. And, they all are Footbowl Bowl Subdivision conferences. I break down the conferences into areas based on the pools of non-conference teams within which they play most of their women’s soccer games. I am guessing that those areas are similar for other sports. I have identified four areas: Middle (i.e., mid-America), Northeast, South (southeast and southwest), and West. Interestingly, at this point it is set that there will be no Fall sports for the Middle, Northeast, and West areas’ conferences. All of the above conferences are in the South area. As I think about this, with all the conferences that currently are set for Fall sports being FBS conferences, it suggests that football is a significant factor influencing their decisions. And, since they all are South area conferences, it may suggest that South area cultural values are a significant factor. They all say that the primary concern affecting their decisions on whether to play in the Fall is student-athlete health and safety. But, it is possible and perhaps likely that football and area cultural values may be affecting their evaluations of the facts (that are available to all the NCAA schools), how they weigh health concerns against other concerns, and so on. It certainly is possible that area cultural values related to football have greater weight in comparison to health and safety considerations in the South area than in the areas within which the other conferences play or are located.
I don’t think its the spread of the virus that is shutting down most of these conferences. It’s the fear of being sued 15-20 years from now that is shutting down these conferences.
If you read all of the statements from the conferences, at least some of them explicitly mentioned concerns about being able to complete the Fall season as something they considered. If we assume potential liability is a major consideration, the conversation would go like this: Legal counsel to conference medical advisors: What is your evaluation of the medical risks players could be exposed to? Medical advisors: There are some risks we can identify at this time, but it is really early to try to identify what the risks are as there is a lot we do not know yet. We think the likelihoods associated with the risks are relatively low, but here too it is really early to try to evaluate the likelihoods, as again there is a lot we do not know yet. Legal counsel: In that case, with it being too early to identify what the risks are and what the likelihoods associated with them are, there is a reasonable chance we could be found negligent for proceeding with sports at this time, if a player contracts the virus as a result of playing and suffers a significant debilitating outcome. Administrators, you will have to decide whether that is a risk you want to take. Administrators: Option A: Thank you all for your advice, that is a liability risk we do not want to take, the benefits of playing are not great enough to outweigh the risk, so we will not play at this time. Option B: Thank you all for your advice, we think the benefits of playing are sufficient that we are willing to play notwithstanding the risks so we will go ahead and play. When I was working, I found myself in legal counsel positions comparable to this many times, and if those involved all are good at their respective roles, this is how the conversations go. As the current situation shows, some administrators can reach one conclusion and other administrators can reach the other.
An interesting read today was an article interviewing the president of Oregon State, F. King Alexander, who’s previous positions as President were 7 years at LSU, Long Beach State, and Murray State. Full interview, which includes a lot of the financial side. https://www.oregonlive.com/beavers/...all-revenue-dries-up-from-2020-21-season.html
And this is what is known as drive-by moderation. I think the last mods appointed by BS were made decades ago.
So the Big Ten is in shambles publicaly fighting among themselves meanwhile, the SEC, Big 12 and ACC non athletes are having the times of their lives as evidenced via videos online. It's a mess. The good news is that it seems like immunity is being seen with mild and asymptomatic cases and it is lasting longer than three months AND it looks like some sort of herd immunity will be about 45%-50%. Both of these are about as encouraging news as I've seen in a long time! There may be hope for a spring season...and reason to be optimistic for the fall 2021 season. NY Times articles below. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/17/...te=1&user_id=42a7d3c1e3a49e83602609c8df37c8fa https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/16/...te=1&user_id=42a7d3c1e3a49e83602609c8df37c8fa
Here’s a question: Let’s say the ACC/SEC/etc plays some sort of fall season. Maybe it’s cut short by outbreaks or maybe they get 10/11 games in but no ncaa tourney. then magically a vaccine comes or herd immunity or whatever and by February the country is in a great spot and it looks like w soccer will get a 18-20 game schedule plus ncaa tourney. Do the teams that played in the fall ALSO get to participate in the spring season? thoughts?
Schools should have the flexibility this year to 'declare' a traditional or non-traditional season. Referred to as non- or championship season. So, I think it could happen that the ACC could have a fall championship season and declare an ACC Champion. That ACC Champion (and other ACC teams) could then make a case to be included in the Spring NCAA Championships. However, they would be bound by the limitations or parameters of a non-championship season in the Spring to prepare. So, only 5 competitive dates I believe. They could ask that those Spring dates be increased to the total allowed for the year (that is, they could ask for the Fall season total count of games to be spread over to the Spring). All hypothetical but possible. There are 10 other things to be thinking about though really. Big10 games in Feb/March outside?? Really? What about Srs that might graduate mid year? What about kids who enroll early midyear? What about the crunch of training space and game management with all teams cranking in the Spring? Many Crazy Layers.
My guess, and it strictly is a guess, is that if the NCAA thinks it may have a national championship tournament in the Spring, rule changes will allow the 20 games-that-count season (plus conference tournaments) to be played any time starting with the beginning of the Fall season (this coming Thursday) through some date in the Spring. If teams play in the Fall, those games will count against the 20. This is about the only thing I can think of that would allow all teams realistically to be competitive for a Spring NCAA tournament. The most interesting question, to me, is how the Women’s Soccer Committee will set up the NCAA tournament bracket. With the likelihood that the great majority of conferences will go conference-only, the RPI simply will not work -- if two conferences are conference only, their RPI ratings will show them as being equally strong even if they are the strongest and weakest conferences. There is a way out of this problem that would allow a full bracket filled mostly by a set number of teams from each conference based on the numbers conferences have had in the tournament in recent years. That would be inconsistent with past NCAA policy, although the circumstances certainly are unique and this approach likely would produce close to the correct bracket. The obvious other approach would be for the tournament to be limited to conference champions only -- or two teams from each conference -- but this approach would not be credible as a true NCAA tournament.
Just saw this.. disappointing - https://www.wral.com/coronavirus/un...-as-campus-coronavirus-crisis-grows/19239935/
"..."[W]e expect the majority of our current undergraduate residential students to change their residential plans for the fall," he said." "..UNC-Chapel Hill officials will "strongly encourage" students to return to their homes and not linger around Chapel Hill, he said, to limit the number of people on campus..."
Very unfortunate, but talking to people with long careers in university student affairs, not unpredictable.. Kid’s brains at that age just don’t make the necessary connections to stay safe. They are invincible at that age. With a 13.6 positive rate and staff getting infected I don’t see how they had any choice. Notre Dame is dealing with its own outbreak,despite reporting that entrance tests showed only a 1% infection rate. The most recent figure I see is 8.3% - well above the 5% the cdc considers acceptable. And the rate for students who attended an off campus party August 3 without social distancing or masks got infected at an astonishing 50% rate.
From Mark Emmert's comments last week: NCAA's Mark Emmert: 'We cannot, at this point, have fall NCAA championships' https://www.ncaa.com/news/ncaa/arti...-we-cannot-point-have-fall-ncaa-championships "..Emmert said they're looking into shrinking bracket sizes, keying in on pre-determined sites and bubble models for sports. "Is it doable? Yeah," Emmert said. "We want to make it work for the students."..."
If I play at the ACC do i risk playing a 10 game fall season and then my team not being eligible for the spring season and postseason tournament? maybe the ncaa will make a determination about those schools who play in the fall and their spring eligibility...and hopefully before games start.
I assume he means championships for the winter and spring sports, but “all those students” doesn’t help make that clear right after the full stop sentence. it also doesn’t seem to be a shout out to moving fall sports to another season
Here are some current numbers: Teams playing in the Fall (so far): 73 Teams that have posted schedules: 18 Posted schedules that need corrections due to other teams not playing or having delayed first game dates: 12 Teams that have not posted schedules: 55 Earliest game date: September 3 Of the teams that have posted schedules, after deleting games not correctly on their schedules: Average number of games per team: 9.6 Proportion of games in conference: 89.0% It is possible that the average number of games per team will go up and that the proportion of in-conference games will go down, if and when more teams post schedules, but it seems unlikely there will be big changes in these numbers. Given the last 2 numbers, the RPI will not work for the Fall. Each number, by itself, is at a level to make this the case. Looking carefully at the posted schedules and the dates of their most recent revisions, it appears that all the conferences except perhaps for the ACC have released their conference schedules to their teams. Perhaps the teams are working on non-conference scheduling? Or perhaps there are discussions going on about whether they really will play in the Fall? There must be some reason why more teams have not yet posted schedules.
I have no faith in college kids to make the choices necessary to be safe. My two youngest kids are back at their respective schools in the Midwest. One is at a small liberal arts school and the other at a Big 10 school. Both have seen pictures on Instagram of kids at large house parties with no regard to safety, no distancing, no masks, hanging all over each other, probably sharing drinking vessels...... Some of these parties were attended by kids on the same day they moved back to campus and from all over the country. Both have said that there have been pockets of outbreaks around campus - and this is all before classes have even started. Yeah, the youth are going to fail on this but I'm just not surprised.
Two comments: 1. We, and the schools, should expect and insist on more from the students. 2. It appears that a large number of students do not think or care very much about whether their schools have Fall sports. Rather, it appears likely to me that it is alums and parents of athletes who care the most about this. These are the ones who are throwing their weight into the decisions whether to have, or not have, Fall sports.
There is a compelling argument that we should be allowing these kids on campus to compete t and not allowing this on campus or off campus.
I completely agree with that sentiment. Unfortunately, these things need to coexist somehow in most college environments. Ever been to an SEC football tailgate? I heard a joke once that if you want to be a college President for a long time you need to do 3 things: -give the alumni winning teams -give the students a way to party -give the faculty plenty of parking Right now, the only thing these schools have plenty of is the parking!
Not many presidents are hitting the trifecta, apparently. median tenure is Around 6 years. They are also getting older, which might point to a last stop before retirement.
I see Notre Dame ilocking students down for two weeks and courses will be online. Another outbreak or parties, they will go online for the rest of the semester and send students home. https://apple.news/A7Cjr0Wp8QESB33zPE2Oekg the current infection rate is 19.1 percent.