|
|
Post by fantom on Jul 2, 2020 17:22:02 GMT -6
The key word there is "trying". Correct. If life could go on without football then there would be no trying. Obviously it’s important or it would already be canceled. If life couldn't go on without football that would have made us "essential" and we never would have closed. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 2, 2020 17:25:34 GMT -6
Which is? I don't follow you. When people get behind the wheel of a car, there is a risk to the community. When they do it without seatbelts, there is an increased risk to themselves (and a minor increase to others with a potential lack of control) When they drive 90 miles an hour, there is an increased risk to themselves and a substantial increased risk to others. I don't think people clamor "Either let me drive 90 without seatbelt, or don't drive at all". Regarding this situation, There will be a risk to the entire community in opening schools up. The reward is there will be some semblance to the educational process traditionally used. There is an argument that there will be an increased risk to the community by having football practice. The reward will be kids get to play football. Are you saying that if public officials, state organizations deem that the increased risk to the community of football isn't worth the reward of getting to play football that the public will then demand that the entire school system be shut down and a return to remote learning be put in place? In my community, there is zero point in opening up schools, or have remote learning without the extra curricular. The football thing is coming from the ncaa. Coach, with all due respect, based on your numerous posts on various subjects, you appear to believe that your community is the worst possible community, with the worst possible kids and the worst possible adults in the worst possible environment in the country. At least that is how your posts come off. |
|
|
|
Post by **** on Jul 2, 2020 17:26:18 GMT -6
The answer is pretty evident based on what the NFL, FBS Schools, and every HS in America is trying to do. Which is? I don't follow you. When people get behind the wheel of a car, there is a risk to the community. When they do it without seatbelts, there is an increased risk to themselves (and a minor increase to others with a potential lack of control) When they drive 90 miles an hour, there is an increased risk to themselves and a substantial increased risk to others. I don't think people clamor "Either let me drive 90 without seatbelt, or don't drive at all". Regarding this situation, There will be a risk to the entire community in opening schools up. The reward is there will be some semblance to the educational process traditionally used. There is an argument that there will be an increased risk to the community by having football practice. The reward will be kids get to play football. Are you saying that if public officials, state organizations deem that the increased risk to the community of football isn't worth the reward of getting to play football that the public will then demand that the entire school system be shut down and a return to remote learning be put in place? Wherever you are from, your community does not operate like any place I have ever been at or even heard of. You have a different view on life, unlike anyone I’ve ever met. I understand I will never see your point of view because I don’t understand your community or life. I also know you will never understand anyone else’s reasoning because your community is vastly different than the rest of the nation. Your community might make it without sports. Mine will die. You will never believe me. I will never believe you. |
|
|
|
Post by **** on Jul 2, 2020 17:28:18 GMT -6
Correct. If life could go on without football then there would be no trying. Obviously it’s important or it would already be canceled. If life couldn't go on without football that would have made us "essential" and we never would have closed. What do you think is happening right now |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2020 17:28:34 GMT -6
In my community, there is zero point in opening up schools, or have remote learning without the extra curricular. The football thing is coming from the ncaa. Coach, with all due respect, based on your numerous posts on various subjects, you appear to believe that your community is the worst possible community, with the worst possible kids and the worst possible adults in the worst possible environment in the country. At least that is how your posts come off. Its pretty bad. I am just speaking from offseason visits with our players in and or at there homes, with “parents”, how our kids speaks, what comes out of their mouths. Its pretty depraved. I am sure there is worse, but I dont need to know or see it. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 2, 2020 17:32:03 GMT -6
Which is? I don't follow you. When people get behind the wheel of a car, there is a risk to the community. When they do it without seatbelts, there is an increased risk to themselves (and a minor increase to others with a potential lack of control) When they drive 90 miles an hour, there is an increased risk to themselves and a substantial increased risk to others. I don't think people clamor "Either let me drive 90 without seatbelt, or don't drive at all". Regarding this situation, There will be a risk to the entire community in opening schools up. The reward is there will be some semblance to the educational process traditionally used. There is an argument that there will be an increased risk to the community by having football practice. The reward will be kids get to play football. Are you saying that if public officials, state organizations deem that the increased risk to the community of football isn't worth the reward of getting to play football that the public will then demand that the entire school system be shut down and a return to remote learning be put in place? Wherever you are from, your community does not operate like any place I have ever been at or even heard of. You have a different view on life, unlike anyone I’ve ever met. I understand I will never see your point of view because I don’t understand your community or life. I also know you will never understand anyone else’s reasoning because your community is vastly different than the rest of the nation. Your community might make it without sports. Mine will die. You will never believe me. I will never believe you. Not that it matters, but I believe you have those roles inverted. My community is attached to a world famous community, but it isn't that different than most in the country. Since we spent a big portion of this back and forth discussing different issues (talking about virtual learning as opposed to in seat open school learning with athletics suspended) I just want to clarify. You are saying that if your state organization or even local district, decides that fall sports will be canceled like spring sports, BUT that schools will be open in some manner with various plans for learning... the community you live in would choose for there students to not attend school and the school system will crumble? And you think I have the wildly different perspective? |
|
|
|
Post by **** on Jul 2, 2020 18:06:07 GMT -6
Wherever you are from, your community does not operate like any place I have ever been at or even heard of. You have a different view on life, unlike anyone I’ve ever met. I understand I will never see your point of view because I don’t understand your community or life. I also know you will never understand anyone else’s reasoning because your community is vastly different than the rest of the nation. Your community might make it without sports. Mine will die. You will never believe me. I will never believe you. Not that it matters, but I believe you have those roles inverted. My community is attached to a world famous community, but it isn't that different than most in the country. Since you spent a big portion of this back and forth not on topic (talking about virtual learning as opposed to in seat open school learning with athletics suspended) I just want to clarify. You are saying that if your state organization or even local district, decides that fall sports will be canceled like spring sports, BUT that schools will be open in some manner with various plans for learning... the community you live in would choose for there students to not attend school and the school system will crumble? And you think I have the wildly different perspective? More than you would think would start working full time so they could make money to support their families yes. |
|
|
|
Post by CS on Jul 2, 2020 18:26:59 GMT -6
Our governor came out in his last press conference with a football and a mask and said if you want this you need to wear this. Pretty much sums up what the public here wants IMO Yes.. but that is a non sequitur statement here. The tangent this thread has taken seems to be that a few coaches here believe that without fall sports schools would close up because so few students would attend. I don't understand why some coaches then post about virtual or remote learning. Sure, I would say anyone who wasn't "anti-football" before would like to see football in the fall. Not sure how that relates to the idea that open school buildings but without football/cheerleading/band services would soon become closed school buildings. It seems there are lots of coaches talking about several different issues. I used that statement more to prove that it’s what everyone is thinking about around here and it is important enough for the governor to address it first thing in his press conference. Some of us are arguing that YES even if the school is open there are places in this world that kids will say “fuk it” if there are no sports or activities. And YES there ARE schools that won’t survive because if it |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 2, 2020 18:51:55 GMT -6
Yes.. but that is a non sequitur statement here. The tangent this thread has taken seems to be that a few coaches here believe that without fall sports schools would close up because so few students would attend. I don't understand why some coaches then post about virtual or remote learning. Sure, I would say anyone who wasn't "anti-football" before would like to see football in the fall. Not sure how that relates to the idea that open school buildings but without football/cheerleading/band services would soon become closed school buildings. It seems there are lots of coaches talking about several different issues. I used that statement more to prove that it’s what everyone is thinking about around here and it is important enough for the governor to address it first thing in his press conference. Some of us are arguing that YES even if the school is open there are places in this world that kids will say “fuk it” if there are no sports or activities. And YES there ARE schools that won’t survive because if it Fair enough. I think that number will be shockingly small though...since you are talking about a fraction of kids playing sports/activities and then a smaller fraction who would then choose not to go to school if they don't have practice afterwards. |
|
|
|
Post by jlenwood on Jul 2, 2020 20:20:41 GMT -6
There is not a politician in this country with the stones to say that the games can go on, and the state school boards and athletic boards are more pathetic than the politicians. What if they are right? Couldn't one argue that taking such measures knowing there will be pushback (like people openly carrying over the "oppression" of being asked to wear a mask...) requires stones? Don't get me wrong, I think when this is looked back upon there will be ample evidence to argue that the measures enacted were done so with questionable logic and on incorrect information. But that 20/20 hindsight is always nice. Right now, those "without stones" are being told by medical professionals and people who have spent their careers studying public health that 1 case creates 3 cases on day 2, which create 9 cases on day 3, which create 27 cases on day 4, which create 81 cases on day 5, which can create over 200 cases on day six etc. Sure you can argue that many if most of those 200 cases will be mild if not asymptomatic. But who has the stones to take that chance? My problem is that a person can not even call out the BS that has been fed us about this disease without being called anti-science. When all of this started, we were told lets shut down and keep the hospitals from overflowing. About 4-6 weeks in the patterns and data (science) were nowhere close to what the experts were telling us. We had other countries data to use, along with data from the US, and it was telling us that certain populations needed protected, and some would not be as adversely affected IF they were exposed to the virus, and yet the Govt stuck to there guns and never wavered or admitted any wrong decisions had been made. When our govt (and schools are our part of the enterprise) can take a scalpel to an issue, they use a cannon. That is why, even when/if those multiplying stats are true it is not leading to terrible sickness in the vast majority of people right now. However, every administrator is so adverse to risk, there is no way they will take this risk, as minimal as it might be, and open the season. I hope I am wrong, but I just don't see HS football in a large swath of this country this year and that is heartbreaking. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 2, 2020 21:21:34 GMT -6
What if they are right? Couldn't one argue that taking such measures knowing there will be pushback (like people openly carrying over the "oppression" of being asked to wear a mask...) requires stones? Don't get me wrong, I think when this is looked back upon there will be ample evidence to argue that the measures enacted were done so with questionable logic and on incorrect information. But that 20/20 hindsight is always nice. Right now, those "without stones" are being told by medical professionals and people who have spent their careers studying public health that 1 case creates 3 cases on day 2, which create 9 cases on day 3, which create 27 cases on day 4, which create 81 cases on day 5, which can create over 200 cases on day six etc. Sure you can argue that many if most of those 200 cases will be mild if not asymptomatic. But who has the stones to take that chance? My problem is that a person can not even call out the BS that has been fed us about this disease without being called anti-science. When all of this started, we were told lets shut down and keep the hospitals from overflowing. About 4-6 weeks in the patterns and data (science) were nowhere close to what the experts were telling us. We had other countries data to use, along with data from the US, and it was telling us that certain populations needed protected, and some would not be as adversely affected IF they were exposed to the virus, and yet the Govt stuck to there guns and never wavered or admitted any wrong decisions had been made. When our govt (and schools are our part of the enterprise) can take a scalpel to an issue, they use a cannon. That is why, even when/if those multiplying stats are true it is not leading to terrible sickness in the vast majority of people right now. However, every administrator is so adverse to risk, there is no way they will take this risk, as minimal as it might be, and open the season. I hope I am wrong, but I just don't see HS football in a large swath of this country this year and that is heartbreaking. Well, couldn't one argue that "the cannon" is what what was keeping the patterns low? Isn't that a success? To make a football analogy, if you lined up Deion Sanders on an opponent's best WR and that WR has zero targets at half time, does the coaching staff say "Hey, we are really screwing this up. They aren't throwing the ball to WR1 at all. Lets match Deion up with someone else."? Don't get me wrong, as I have said elsewhere on this forum, I have first hand experience with this virus. Immediate family member with several of the at risk comorbidities tested positive. By most accounts the family member should be dead, but instead exhibited zero symptoms. The amount of logical inconsistencies in policies I have experienced as a result are definitely head scratching. I also think that with the benefit of hindsight, the medical community (administrative, not the front line docs treating the patients) are going to discover that the testing process was flawed and therefore the data being used to make decisions was incorrect and therefore the policies were probably incorrect. However I do think that the idea that the images of Italy using ice rinks as a morgue would probably have given any of those Monday morning quarterbacking this pause at the time. Also I do think the idea of "just isolate the 'at risk'" is extremely reductive. |
|
|
|
Post by mrjvi on Jul 3, 2020 13:59:55 GMT -6
Yes money crunch. NY is near bankrupcy from poor financial management.
|
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Jul 3, 2020 17:03:23 GMT -6
The key word there is "trying". Correct. If life could go on without football then there would be no trying. Obviously it’s important or it would already be canceled. Being outside the world of football for a year now, I think you'd be shocked at what a small % of the population give a crap about football. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2020 17:06:54 GMT -6
Correct. If life could go on without football then there would be no trying. Obviously it’s important or it would already be canceled. Being outside the world of football for a year now, I think you'd be shocked at what a small % of the population give a crap about football. Its social gathering. People care to that extent. Its a reason, drink and socialize. At family get together, Super Bowl, CFB playoff games. Everybody has their shirts, hats, but they couldn’t tell you what happened from one play to the next. Its important, but not in the way many on here would think. And I think the super majority already know that. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 3, 2020 17:17:47 GMT -6
Being outside the world of football for a year now, I think you'd be shocked at what a small % of the population give a crap about football. Its social gathering. People care to that extent. Its a reason, drink and socialize. At family get together, Super Bowl, CFB playoff games. Everybody has their shirts, hats, but they couldn’t tell you what happened from one play to the next. Its important, but not in the way many on here would think. And I think the super majority already know that. Yeah, but keep in mind that since 1999, the college football championship game (bcs or cfp) has only reached 50% of the Friends finale a handfull of times. Most years less than 1/2 of number of people who watched the last “Friends” watch the college football Championship Plus, arent we discussing HS ball, which is magnitudes less important to people |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2020 17:23:00 GMT -6
Its social gathering. People care to that extent. Its a reason, drink and socialize. At family get together, Super Bowl, CFB playoff games. Everybody has their shirts, hats, but they couldn’t tell you what happened from one play to the next. Its important, but not in the way many on here would think. And I think the super majority already know that. Yeah, but keep in mind that since 1999, the college football championship game (bcs or cfp) has only reached 50% of the Friends finale a handfull of times. Most years less than 1/2 of number of people who watched the last “Friends” watch the college football Championship Plus, arent we discussing HS ball, which is magnitudes less important to people Its important to certain portion of the population, but the masses are watching. Doesn’t mean they have a clue as to what’s going on, or that they care. This is true on Friday nights. Its becomes something once they are in the seats. The score important, but beyond that...its something else. Football is just an event. The content to most in unimportant. |
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Jul 3, 2020 17:23:42 GMT -6
Being outside the world of football for a year now, I think you'd be shocked at what a small % of the population give a crap about football. Its social gathering. People care to that extent. Its a reason, drink and socialize. At family get together, Super Bowl, CFB playoff games. Everybody has their shirts, hats, but they couldn’t tell you what happened from one play to the next. Its important, but not in the way many on here would think. And I think the super majority already know that. If football isn't played, they will still gather for other reasons. To think football is a driving force of the majority, or even half of America is only trying to justify self interest. Less than 1/3 of Americans even watched the Super Bowl. 30.4% to be exact. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 3, 2020 17:28:10 GMT -6
Yeah, but keep in mind that since 1999, the college football championship game (bcs or cfp) has only reached 50% of the Friends finale a handfull of times. Most years less than 1/2 of number of people who watched the last “Friends” watch the college football Championship Plus, arent we discussing HS ball, which is magnitudes less important to people Its important to certain portion of the population, but the masses are watching. Doesn’t mean they have a clue as to what’s going on, or that they care. This is true on Friday nights. Its becomes something once they are in the seats. The score important, but beyond that...its something else. Football is just an event. The content to most in unimportant. Maybe, but I just provided evidence that seeing Ross,Rachel,Monica and the gang saying their goodbyes was doubly important to people... |
|
|
|
Post by **** on Jul 3, 2020 17:49:45 GMT -6
Correct. If life could go on without football then there would be no trying. Obviously it’s important or it would already be canceled. Being outside the world of football for a year now, I think you'd be shocked at what a small % of the population give a crap about football. That doesn’t surprise me. I would 100% believe that. What matters is the revenue that football brings in at all levels. If football wasn’t important it would be cancelled already. Everything is about money. Not football. Problem is football is the money maker. Thus here we are talking about all levels playing football. |
|
|
|
Post by greenwell on Jul 3, 2020 18:35:10 GMT -6
People in my town used to argue smoking in stores , restaurants, and buildings was not bad either and that the city council were imbeciles for such a ban. Free country and all. Now, the thought of seeing someone put out a cigarette in their mash potatoes seems impossible now. Time will heal these hills as well. 100,000 deaths is still a lot in my mind.
I’ll take the season off if the experts at what they do say it is best.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 3, 2020 18:35:59 GMT -6
Being outside the world of football for a year now, I think you'd be shocked at what a small % of the population give a crap about football. That doesn’t surprise me. I would 100% believe that. What matters is the revenue that football brings in at all levels. If football wasn’t important it would be cancelled already. Everything is about money. Not football. Problem is football is the money maker. Thus here we are talking about all levels playing football. While it may be the highest revenue sport, it is also the highest expense sport. Many if not most colleges (and one could probably say HS too) LOOSE money on football. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 3, 2020 18:46:16 GMT -6
People in my town used to argue smoking in stores , restaurants, and buildings was not bad either and that the city council were imbeciles for such a ban. Free country and all. Now, the thought of seeing someone put out a cigarette in their mash potatoes seems impossible now. Time will heal these hills as well. 100,000 deaths is still a lot in my mind. I’ll take the season off if the experts at what they do say it is best. Don't forget seat belts. |
|
|
|
Post by coachklee on Jul 3, 2020 18:48:02 GMT -6
Several schools are looking at the covid data and beginning to weigh their options to return. Not just assume a position. Many are figuring out that if they don’t go back now, they might never go back. Because they will not survive without sports. Their attendance will be awful and they will not receive enough funding from the state to survive. Along with the fact that a good chunk of teachers will leave the profession without sports, and they know there is already a shortage of people to hire. Schools are starting to think about the financial and long term impact of closing down and weighing the risks. They’re considering more than ‘what’s best for the kids right now’ How do you figure that sports affects attendance to such a degree that it will financially impact a school regarding state attendance? Aren't students required to attend a school until a certain age in each state? If a school chooses not to open the buildings, won't they be required to provide distance learning alternatives (and therefore will have students and enrollment onwhich to base funding?) Or are you talking about a situation where there is no pre assigned attendance zones combined with overlapping or competing LEAs? At least 1 school district nearby us that my HC’s wife works at conducted a survey from parents that a significant percentage of parents indicated they would straight up home school their students if school didn’t resume as normal (I think 20%). They could easily find online curriculum to follow and the school would be out the $8000 per pupil in state funding for those students if they are not enrolled. Yes law mandates students are in school, but that doesn’t mean they have to be attending public school. I could understand parents with the means to do so to decide that traditional brick & mortar public schools aren’t worth it unless the full school culture was there for the student. |
|
|
|
Post by coachklee on Jul 3, 2020 18:53:55 GMT -6
If fewer kids are in schools then the state isn't going to provide as much money to said school. Why give the school $7,000(generic number) for a kid that's staying home? So you will have to lay people off because you can't afford to pay them and the ripple effect happens. I have worked a few places where the school was the largest employer in the area. Why keep a small school on the verge of consolidation open if there are no or fewer kids attending? Surely you can see that some schools will have problems keeping the door open. Because the student is still enrolled in the school. That is why they get whatever the per pupil funding amount is. The school is still providing the distance learning (if allowed by the state DOE). Now, I am not as familiar with how homeschool would work, and if these families chose homeschool I would imagine then no funding. But if a family is choosing homeschool, that is different than a school not opening its doors and providing distance learning options, and logically a family choosing homeschool would do that regardless of sports being offered. My Aunt & Uncle only sent their children that participated in extracurriculars to public high school. The two that didn’t participate continued to homeschool. I know of at least 1 student we have that is only in our school to participate in band & I think one sport. Is it a lot? Probably not. Does every student & especially an entire family of 3 or more count in smaller district? Absolutely. |
|
|
|
Post by coachklee on Jul 3, 2020 18:56:25 GMT -6
People are saying if there aren't sports in some places that's what keeps kids coming to school each day. Shut down sports now those kids attendance is spotty and drives down the overall attendance % for the school which in some places will lead to the state withholding funding. Not to mention we have kids who are now working basically full time and have been since March so what is their major incentive to come back to school if there aren't sports for them? It's very relative to each situation and socio-economic situation. Schools where education isn't as valued will suffer more than those where it is. Not to hard to figure out. I would challenge that notion, and say that the % of the student population that participates in sports is relatively small in the vast majority of schools...and the percentage of THAT small percentage that would quit going to school all together if there were no sports is smaller. Plus truancy laws would affect most underclassmen in that situation correct? You can't really scroll through 4 pages without running into a post with pleas for help about numbers. Trying to get numbers up, and complaining about the kids and all of their options other than football. But now somehow so many kids are just going to up and quit going to school (and be able to ) if sports aren't offered that the school will have to shut down? Once a kid hits about 9th to 10th grade truancy laws are minimally enforced. Might be even less so if the “role” of social workers is expanded as demanded in some areas. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 3, 2020 18:56:25 GMT -6
How do you figure that sports affects attendance to such a degree that it will financially impact a school regarding state attendance? Aren't students required to attend a school until a certain age in each state? If a school chooses not to open the buildings, won't they be required to provide distance learning alternatives (and therefore will have students and enrollment onwhich to base funding?) Or are you talking about a situation where there is no pre assigned attendance zones combined with overlapping or competing LEAs? At least 1 school district nearby us that my HC’s wife works at conducted a survey from parents that a significant percentage of parents indicated they would straight up home school their students if school didn’t resume as normal (I think 20%). They could easily find online curriculum to follow and the school would be out the $8000 per pupil in state funding for those students if they are not enrolled. Yes law mandates students are in school, but that doesn’t mean they have to be attending public school. I could understand parents with the means to do so to decide that traditional brick & mortar public schools aren’t worth it unless the full school culture was there for the student. Can you clarify "resume as normal" I can absolutely see that type of response compared to some various mix of distance and in seat learning, modified or platooned schedule etc. But that those same 1/5 parents would home school (at the HS level mind you) if they had daily open school buildings but not extra curriculars? I don't know if that is what the parents were indicating. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2020 20:22:23 GMT -6
Its social gathering. People care to that extent. Its a reason, drink and socialize. At family get together, Super Bowl, CFB playoff games. Everybody has their shirts, hats, but they couldn’t tell you what happened from one play to the next. Its important, but not in the way many on here would think. And I think the super majority already know that. If football isn't played, they will still gather for other reasons. To think football is a driving force of the majority, or even half of America is only trying to justify self interest. Less than 1/3 of Americans even watched the Super Bowl. 30.4% to be exact. 30 pct is a 100 million people that, is significant. I am not suggesting that people wont survive without it. I am not that naive. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2020 20:27:47 GMT -6
Its important to certain portion of the population, but the masses are watching. Doesn’t mean they have a clue as to what’s going on, or that they care. This is true on Friday nights. Its becomes something once they are in the seats. The score important, but beyond that...its something else. Football is just an event. The content to most in unimportant. Maybe, but I just provided evidence that seeing Ross,Rachel,Monica and the gang saying their goodbyes was doubly important to people... I wasnt one of them, and I didn’t and dont care about “Friends.” And your point is my point. It was a reason to gather. But the show had zero affect on people’s daily lives. Then and Now. At some point, athletics as we know it will as well. |
|
|
|
Post by **** on Jul 3, 2020 20:38:21 GMT -6
That doesn’t surprise me. I would 100% believe that. What matters is the revenue that football brings in at all levels. If football wasn’t important it would be cancelled already. Everything is about money. Not football. Problem is football is the money maker. Thus here we are talking about all levels playing football. While it may be the highest revenue sport, it is also the highest expense sport. Many if not most colleges (and one could probably say HS too) LOOSE money on football. Depends entirely on the school. I know my school only makes money off football and basketball, then a whopping $0 off every other sport. Football and basketball is our only profitable sport. Revenue, or brand wise. Everyone knows football is king when it comes to sports. At every level. If the world would survive without football, we’d all be closed down right now. If Tennis was our states money maker we would’ve already closed football down for the fall due to the potential close contact health risks. It’s not about ‘football’, it’s all about money. And football = big money in every aspect of 99% of schools. |
|
|
|
Post by **** on Jul 3, 2020 20:49:21 GMT -6
Everyone thinks 'football' is saving football. Couldn't be farther from the truth. We are talking about a meaningless game in the grand scheme of things. We don't really 'need' to play football but there is a reason everyone in this nation is trying to make it happen. Money.
Capitalism is saving football. It's all about money. It is by far the most profitable sport in America. If it wasn't then we wouldn't be playing this fall.
We're talking about the economic impact of not playing, not 'we have to play because football saves kids lives by teaching them how to work hard'. The NFL is playing, FBS is playing and in turn, HS will play too. The only thing preventing any of that from happening is Trump shutting everything dow, and I don't see that happening again.
How do I know NFL and FBS is playing? I know several coaches at both levels and there is zero sign of them slowing down. The only thing they might do differently is play with limited to no fans. No fans means a 10% revenue cut. No games? Over 50% due to TV contracts. They are playing this fall. Even the media has figured it out already.
|
|
