|
Post by Chris Clement on Aug 8, 2018 9:33:41 GMT -6
It’s not at all a difficult HVAC problem to run ducting so that all the lockers get similar airflow. And suggest that the whole room have some upgraded ventilation, maybe a purge system like a chem lab. It’s not good ventilating each locker if the room is at 100% humidity.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Aug 6, 2018 22:05:13 GMT -6
Something simple like dodgeball could work. Throwing, agility, catching. It’s basically triage to get an idea of who is an athlete or not before you get started. It has a lot less overhead than a bunch of drills.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Aug 6, 2018 12:24:11 GMT -6
Is there a way to run piping through each locker and then you can blow air through each locker from behind?
The biggest thing is being able to direct airflow at the moisture. If you can’t do that then the next best thing is to move air in bulk, ideally with the building’s ventilation and a commercial air mover.
I can give you some better technical suggestions if you can provide more detail on the situation.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Aug 3, 2018 17:56:42 GMT -6
Are there rate stats? How is the percentage of students playing football changing?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 30, 2018 8:50:07 GMT -6
I guess we can ads Title IX to the list of things you don’t understand.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 29, 2018 18:55:39 GMT -6
Sometimes the threat of a stink is better than the stink itself. Make a clear threat to challenge it and they'll likely fold on the proviso that you keep it quiet. School boards don't care what employees think. Now, if the parents of some girls complain that's a different story. Sorry that's what I meant. Threaten that the parents will challenge it.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 29, 2018 18:45:36 GMT -6
Sometimes the threat of a stink is better than the stink itself. Make a clear threat to challenge it and they'll likely fold on the proviso that you keep it quiet.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 26, 2018 10:33:28 GMT -6
So what more do we know of this shadowy canal of football-haters with a lot of money and a long-term vision? Who’s in charge? What’s the big plan? How do they benefit?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 26, 2018 9:44:22 GMT -6
Is it ten years or never then?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 26, 2018 9:03:12 GMT -6
I’m not sure you understand what grant money is and does.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 25, 2018 20:52:24 GMT -6
give me 150 a year and i might be ok with that IIRC, the guy Tuberville smacked was a grad assistant. Or, put another way, "university staff member strikes student."
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 25, 2018 20:49:23 GMT -6
Kinda weird how in two days we went from "never" to "ten years."
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 24, 2018 6:04:46 GMT -6
Also look into job site speakers at hardware store. I have a really number that serves me well, it can plug into the wall or run off the same battery as your drill, if plugged into the wall it can also charge said batteries and charge your phone, and you can close the phone into a compartment for safekeeping.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 22, 2018 17:00:48 GMT -6
That is debateable especially now a days but that will have to be done in another setting. Best. Troll. Ever. And like morons, we keep feeding you because we genuinely thought/think you are a football coach who cares about his players and the game. Honestly, based on previous posts and threads, I think he’s just thick.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 22, 2018 14:31:43 GMT -6
I don’t believe in science. It’s not a religion. You don’t put faith in it. You gather evidence and you follow that evidence whether you like the results or not. That’s the great thing about science, it’s true whether you believe it or not.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 22, 2018 14:15:27 GMT -6
All right, since I’m in for a penny:
1. You asked me to humour you but I really don’t think you understand the phrase, it doesn’t make sense on the context you used it, you just tried to flip my previous post back on me.
2. You claim the “evidence” is inadequate then say that no amount of evidence could ever satisfy you. If the very notion of following evidence is anathema to you then I don’t know what to tell you.
3. You talk about science in a way that belies that you don’t understand it at all. It’s just the rigorous examination of the physical world. There’s nothing to invent.
4. You don’t seem to understand how evidence works. There’s no such notion of an “omnibus study” that determines something conclusively. You set out to research some very small, testable notion with the data you have available and you come away with a small, probabilistic conclusion with a pretty wide uncertainty. Someone else does something similar and again and again, eventually an overarching pattern emerges. Someone writes a paper that combines all of those to create a theme. Repeat many times over and the confidence grows. You never establish something 100%, it’s impossible, but you become ever more confident. It’s statistically possible that gravity is just a coincidence, or caused by magic invisible faeries, but that possibility is vanishingly small. Similarly, the likelihood that massive head trauma causes brain damage is not in doubt. The probability that repeated minor or moderate brain trauma causes long term damage, well that’s getting clearer slowly but surely. The degree to which it happens and can be controlled is somewhat uncertain.
5. You don’t understand risk management and applied probability. Everything in life involves a lot of probabilistic risks. We manage those by examining cost and benefit. We drive places instead of walking because the risk of a fatal crash is acceptable given the time savings (granted there are a lot of secondary considerations but it’s just a bigger version of the same calculation). We played football a certain way at a certain time because we were balancing the risks and benefits, with the information available at the time. That information has changed, ergo the calculus changes.
6. You’ve got a black and white perspective of everything here. It’s a bogus straw man to dismiss whatever doesn’t fit your world view. Don’t like the results of this research? Pick a criticism and dismiss it outright. Like this result? Tout it as definitive.
7. You’ve got a bubble bias. Football isn’t the only sport under attack, it’s just the only sport you follow seriously on the issue. Soccer has a lot of hand-wringing over teaching heading at young ages. Hockey is waffling on contact ages and helmet standards.
8. You’ve created calamitous consequences to everything. If a rule of an arbitrary game is modified, the game becomes unrecognizable! If the game is unrecognizable, the game will cease to exist! If the game ceases to exist, the country will collapse!
9. You keep demanding to be convinced by evidence after having already said that no amount of evidence will convince you. There’s no helping you there.
I don’t love every rule change, some of them are poorly conceived and aren’t great from a process perspective, but the same could be said about tons of rules, safety related or otherwise, but playing the victim of a mass conspiracy is the height of narcissism, and reactionary thinking just isn’t going to work. If the future frightens you, it’s because you’re not prepared for it.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 22, 2018 12:36:52 GMT -6
You’ve already made it clear that you don’t grasp the notion of evidence so you probably shouldn’t comment on it.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 22, 2018 9:18:03 GMT -6
Right, but the nearest athletes of that calibre for me are a two hour drive away. I doubt I’m alone in that.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 22, 2018 9:06:17 GMT -6
Yes, the notion has been discussed at length before here. Most of us don’t live where such athletes are available on demand but we can look up their measurables.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 22, 2018 8:30:53 GMT -6
@jbwolfe off topic, but do you know how rough water polo is? Things get real nasty underwater.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 21, 2018 19:17:01 GMT -6
“fb doesn't need us mortals yapping our gums to teach life lessons.” That’s a Chewbacca defense of ever I heard one.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 21, 2018 18:35:58 GMT -6
What the devil does that even mean???
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 21, 2018 18:03:28 GMT -6
To what end?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 21, 2018 17:53:59 GMT -6
So there’s no possible amount of evidence that would convince you that changes are necessary?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 21, 2018 17:39:40 GMT -6
Humour me, what p-value?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 21, 2018 17:36:04 GMT -6
I’m curious what standard of evidence it would take to satisfy you, or would the goalposts just keep right on moving?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 21, 2018 12:05:31 GMT -6
We have a really great setup similar to Boston college, the hockey and football are back to back so you double up all the facilities, concessions, the football stands are built into the rink's structure, so you could make that work and save a lot of building hassle. You could put baseball and softball with foul lines abutted, and then out the main structure along the two collinear foul lines that would align with the middle of the football field. I wonder if the football field can be offset within the track so that the far set of stands fits between the track and the field? That would cover almost all your sports. Could you better explain the orientation of the concessions within the facility? I assume there are hallways that connect the football side to the hockey side and the concessions are there?
The field can be offset that way, a local school has a nice set of concrete stands(the original portion is over 80 years old) on the home side and the visitors use a pretty nice but small set of aluminum stands that are inside the track. They've held regional track meets for years with no issues. Viewing track events isint great due to not being able to see the participants when theyre behind the visitor stands but it works pretty well for a stadium with limited space
I think you’re grossly overthinking this. Imagine a hockey arena. Sink the rink so that the concourse, which is behind the stands, is at ground level. Change rooms are at ice level, so in the “basement.” Place a football field parallel to the hockey rink, such that midfield and the red line are collinear. Space them literally so that the football stands are abutted to the arena. So the concourse runs under the football stands, and concessions are in there, much like the upper decks of many pro stadia. From the changerooms put a set of stairs coming up to field level where they pop out from under the stands. Here’s an example:
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 18, 2018 12:09:11 GMT -6
Would love to see it (not being sarcastic).
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 18, 2018 8:13:45 GMT -6
It measures EKG, Brain Waves, Metabolism, CNS. Take those data points together and you can determine if an athlete is ready to practice. Your central nervous system can only handle so many max efforts in a week. Some say three, some say less. We use the 40/10 fly trend as a way to help us determine if a guy is too worn out to go full. Is this an evidence-based position?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 16, 2018 7:15:01 GMT -6
Gott im Himmel! Instant TD.
|
|