Recruiting is going to be interesting. I'm guessing there won't be many (any?) high school basketball games. My local school district just went 100% virtual for the first quarter. The second quarter is when the second wave is supposed to hit. That's when hoops starts. How can there be a season if the normal winter virus season hits and includes Covid along with influenza? And yes, it appears that you can test positive for flu and Covid at the same time.
Maybe the AAU travel teams will be more aggressive in allowing games, but even they often rely on local schools and gyms to play games. If those are closed, how is anyone going to play, and how are coaches going to observe players in action?
Coaches and players may end up rolling the dice when making decisions about who to offer, and what school to attend.
Last Edit: Jul 17, 2020 9:20:25 GMT -5 by vastagman
Recruiting is going to be interesting. I'm guessing there won't be many (any?) high school basketball games. My local school district just went 100% virtual for the first quarter. The second quarter is when the second wave is supposed to hit. That's when hoops starts. How can there be a season if the normal winter virus season hits and includes Covid along with influenza? And yes, it appears that you can test positive for flu and Covid at the same time.
Maybe the AAU travel teams will be more aggressive in allowing games, but even they often rely on local schools and gyms to play games. If those are closed, how is anyone going to play, and how are coaches going to observe players in action?
Coaches and players may end up rolling the dice when making decisions about who to offer, and what school to attend.
Surely as you say, an impossible situation to predict at the moment. However, just in thinking ahead about high school basketball in Connecticut, my guess (and that's all it is) is that there will be a season even if it starts a bit later than the normal starting time of the third week in December, and they will play a full season of 20 regular season games. I know, I know, things could still be problematic at that time, but I am optimistic anyway. We'll see. As far as offers of future players from strictly a Fairfield standpoint, I am glad to see that Jay Young and his staff have apparently already identified some very good players about to go into their junior and senior years based on what I know about at least 4 of the listed guys on the VC list. Therefore even without further in game recruiting to rely on, I think they are very understanding of some of the skills these kids would bring to the table, something that should reward them if at least a couple became Stags in the future. But there is a lot more uncertainty than in normal times, on that I would agree.
Post by nashvillestag on Jul 18, 2020 8:54:10 GMT -5
Interesting article in the New York Post this morning where Seton Hall's Coach Kevin Willard has a different take than many in regards to how and when college basketball teams in his league (the Big East of course) should proceed in order to get ready and then execute the 2020-21 season. As far as each squad coming together, unlike a majority of viewpoints, his suggestion is RIGHT NOW while no other regular students are on campus, this would be the perfect time to come together. Sort of a natural "bubble" type situation to take advantage of in his mind. And further, assuming conditions haven't deteriorated as the fall season approaches, play only games against league opponents (unless other leagues agree to the exact same rules as the BE) with as many as 26 contests for each school team to participate in. Look, Willard is a well-respected coach who like all other well-respected coaches certainly should have an opinion that is valued with regard to the sport. And because of that, although at first this idea seems a bit radical, well in thinking about this further, maybe it does indeed have merit. Won't matter to the MAAC of course because they have made their decision to not bring basketball players back until the regular students show up. But with this thought out there from an important figure in the game, if nothing else this should create more open discussion and dialogue, surely a good thing in the grand scheme of things I would think.
Seton Hall’s Kevin Willard: Don’t delay college hoops season
Waiting is not the best policy in this situation, Kevin Willard believes.
As more and more conferences postpone fall sports, football season hangs in the balance and talk has picked up of possibly delaying the college basketball season until Jan. 1 — Hall of Fame coach Rick Pitino has now twice tweeted that suggestion — Willard thinks that would be a mistake.
“I do not agree with pushing it back, because I think we’re missing a window,” the Seton Hall coach, who is part of the Big East COVID-19 Task Force, told The Post. “Every school has said after Thanksgiving there will be no one on campus, so why would we not take advantage of having no one on campus? It’s almost like being in a bubble and being able to have almost no interaction with any of the students. It’s probably the safest time to play.
“Sitting back and waiting for flu season and waiting for kids to come back on campus is idiotic.”......
Interesting article in the New York Post this morning where Seton Hall's Coach Kevin Willard has a different take than many in regards to how and when college basketball teams in his league (the Big East of course) should proceed in order to get ready and then execute the 2020-21 season. As far as each squad coming together, unlike a majority of viewpoints, his suggestion is RIGHT NOW while no other regular students are on campus, this would be the perfect time to come together. Sort of a natural "bubble" type situation to take advantage of in his mind. And further, assuming conditions haven't deteriorated as the fall season approaches, play only games against league opponents (unless other leagues agree to the exact same rules as the BE) with as many as 26 contests for each school team to participate in. Look, Willard is a well-respected coach who like all other well-respected coaches certainly should have an opinion that is valued with regard to the sport. And because of that, although at first this idea seems a bit radical, well in thinking about this further, maybe it does indeed have merit. Won't matter to the MAAC of course because they have made their decision to not bring basketball players back until the regular students show up. But with this thought out there from an important figure in the game, if nothing else this should create more open discussion and dialogue, surely a good thing in the grand scheme of things I would think.
And in relation to this thought, according to well-known college BB insider Jeff Goodman who just did a study of the 87 schools in the high-major category, by the end of this week at least 59 of the teams will be out on the court working as a team with full coaching instruction. Is this good or bad, dangerous or not so much? Hard to tell. But one thing it will do, assuming conditions don't make them stop practicing, is that it will serve to make their squads a lot more fine-tuned and ready to hit the ground running when the new season begins, at least relative to the other schools and leagues who are turning down the opportunity to start practice now as the NCAA allows. With this in mind regarding Fairfield and MAAC institutions in particular, competing against these squads in an early season OOC contest would appear to be even more suicidal than normal, would it not? All the more reason why a league season starting in January might be the most likely scenario for the coming year.
Last Edit: Jul 21, 2020 11:58:54 GMT -5 by nashvillestag
Interesting article in the New York Post this morning where Seton Hall's Coach Kevin Willard has a different take than many in regards to how and when college basketball teams in his league (the Big East of course) should proceed in order to get ready and then execute the 2020-21 season. As far as each squad coming together, unlike a majority of viewpoints, his suggestion is RIGHT NOW while no other regular students are on campus, this would be the perfect time to come together. Sort of a natural "bubble" type situation to take advantage of in his mind. And further, assuming conditions haven't deteriorated as the fall season approaches, play only games against league opponents (unless other leagues agree to the exact same rules as the BE) with as many as 26 contests for each school team to participate in. Look, Willard is a well-respected coach who like all other well-respected coaches certainly should have an opinion that is valued with regard to the sport. And because of that, although at first this idea seems a bit radical, well in thinking about this further, maybe it does indeed have merit. Won't matter to the MAAC of course because they have made their decision to not bring basketball players back until the regular students show up. But with this thought out there from an important figure in the game, if nothing else this should create more open discussion and dialogue, surely a good thing in the grand scheme of things I would think.
And in relation to this thought, according to well-known college BB insider Jeff Goodman who just did a study of the 87 schools in the high-major category, by the end of this week at least 59 of the teams will be out on the court working as a team with full coaching instruction. Is this good or bad, dangerous or not so much? Hard to tell. But one thing it will do, assuming conditions don't make them stop practicing, is that it will serve to make their squads a lot more fine-tuned and ready to hit the ground running when the new season begins, at least relative to the other schools and leagues who are turning down the opportunity to start practice now as the NCAA allows. With this in mind regarding Fairfield and MAAC institutions in particular, competing against these squads in an early season OOC contest would appear to be even more suicidal than normal, would it not? All the more reason why a league season starting in January might be the most likely scenario for the coming year.
You know in Connecticut we have yet to have a single corona virus death of a school age person. I wonder, 1) How many healthy college athletes will show signs of coronavirus if they get exposed, and if they get sick 2) how sick will they get? It looking at the numbers they don't suggest there is a big risk to the healthy college student, the real risk seems to be to older fans and coaches.
I agree that the chance of healthy college students are not the ones that are getting sick. However, college students can be Asymptomatic carriers and this is clearly a way that this spreads. ....... to fans, coaches, refs, parents and old people. The use of a "Bubble" might make things better.
And in relation to this thought, according to well-known college BB insider Jeff Goodman who just did a study of the 87 schools in the high-major category, by the end of this week at least 59 of the teams will be out on the court working as a team with full coaching instruction. Is this good or bad, dangerous or not so much? Hard to tell. But one thing it will do, assuming conditions don't make them stop practicing, is that it will serve to make their squads a lot more fine-tuned and ready to hit the ground running when the new season begins, at least relative to the other schools and leagues who are turning down the opportunity to start practice now as the NCAA allows. With this in mind regarding Fairfield and MAAC institutions in particular, competing against these squads in an early season OOC contest would appear to be even more suicidal than normal, would it not? All the more reason why a league season starting in January might be the most likely scenario for the coming year.
You know in Connecticut we have yet to have a single corona virus death of a school age person. I wonder, 1) How many healthy college athletes will show signs of coronavirus if they get exposed, and if they get sick 2) how sick will they get? It looking at the numbers they don't suggest there is a big risk to the healthy college student, the real risk seems to be to older fans and coaches.
[/quote]You know in Connecticut we have yet to have a single corona virus death of a school age person.
Not to nit pick but Incorrect: Sheryll Enriquez, a Stamford resident, 21, died of COVID-19 in April 2020. She graduated from Brien McMahon High School in Norwalk, Conn. in 2017.
There was another death of a kid under 9 years old.
But as JoeStag and RF both stated, it's not the kids death rate, it's the transmission rate to people who are venerable.
And we don't have great data on that as our contact tracing process has been fundamentally non existent due to the time it often takes to get results.
A reliable instant swab test, like a pregnancy test, can help get things up and going.
Last Edit: Jul 22, 2020 5:00:39 GMT -5 by paulie74
You know in Connecticut we have yet to have a single corona virus death of a school age person.
Not to nit pick but Incorrect: Sheryll Enriquez, a Stamford resident, 21, died of COVID-19 in April 2020. She graduated from Brien McMahon High School in Norwalk, Conn. in 2017.
There was another death of a kid under 9 years old.
But as JoeStag and RF both stated, it's not the kids death rate, it's the transmission rate to people who are venerable.
And we don't have great data on that as our contact tracing process has been fundamentally non existent due to the time it often takes to get results.
A reliable instant swab test, like a pregnancy test, can help get things up and going.
At the time of my post there was one death in the 0-9 year old category, reportedly a child under the age of 1. There is not agreement that this child died of covid but there was a positive covid test result and the state choose to classify this child as a Covid death. I don't know enough about the case to comment further, but either way the child was not school age. There were no deaths listed in the 10-19 year old category last week. There has been one recorded this week. I did not consider the 20-29 year old group as "school age" and you are correct there have been 4 Connecticut deaths in that age group according to the department of health. I am familiar with 2 of the cases, one was a girl from waterbury who was 23 who had lupus, and other was a stage 4 cancer patient that contracted Covid. So the two folks I am aware of had serious underlying health conditions, that would not make them healthy college age athletes. I am not familiar with the Stamford case or the 4th case that shows up in the numbers, I don't know their ages or underlying health scenarios. Here is a graph that shows these metrics
We all want to avoid any deaths from this condition, but when you look at the numbers the high risk seems to be to the older coaches, administrators and fans versus the athletes. In Connecticut more than 80% of the folks that have died of Covid Contracted it while they were patients in a medical facility, assisted living facility or nursing home. (statistics from CT Dept of Health as of July 7). CT Corona Virus Deaths as of July 7th 2,755 Nursing home patients 371 Assisted Living facilities patients 411 Hospital patients 3537 Total 4,348 Total Deaths
CT Post Article Again the deaths seem to be primarily among the aged and infirmed.
Last Edit: Jul 22, 2020 16:47:40 GMT -5 by reindeerfan
You know in Connecticut we have yet to have a single corona virus death of a school age person.
Not to nit pick but Incorrect: Sheryll Enriquez, a Stamford resident, 21, died of COVID-19 in April 2020. She graduated from Brien McMahon High School in Norwalk, Conn. in 2017.
There was another death of a kid under 9 years old.
But as JoeStag and RF both stated, it's not the kids death rate, it's the transmission rate to people who are venerable.
And we don't have great data on that as our contact tracing process has been fundamentally non existent due to the time it often takes to get results.
A reliable instant swab test, like a pregnancy test, can help get things up and going.
At the time of my post there was one death in the 0-9 year old category, reportedly a child under the age of 1. There is not agreement that this child died of covid but there was a positive covid test result and the state choose to classify this child as a Covid death. I don't know enough about the case to comment further, but either way the child was not school age. There were no deaths listed in the 10-19 year old category last week. There has been one recorded this week. I did not consider the 20-29 year old group as "school age" and you are correct there have been 4 Connecticut deaths in that age group according to the department of health. I am familiar with 2 of the cases, one was a girl from waterbury who was 23 who had lupus, and other was a stage 4 cancer patient that contracted Covid. So the two folks I am aware of had serious underlying health conditions, that would not make them healthy college age athletes. I am not familiar with the Stamford case or the 4th case that shows up in the numbers, I don't know their ages or underlying health scenarios. Here is a graph that shows these metrics
We all want to avoid any deaths from this condition, but when you look at the numbers the high risk seems to be to the older coaches, administrators and fans versus the athletes. In Connecticut more than 80% of the folks that have died of Covid Contracted it while they were patients in a medical facility, assisted living facility or nursing home. (statistics from CT Dept of Health as of July 7). CT Corona Virus Deaths as of July 7th 2,755 Nursing home patients 371 Assisted Living facilities patients 411 Hospital patients 3537 Total 4,348 Total Deaths
CT Post Article Again the deaths seem to be primarily among the aged and infirmed. [/quote
RF, not in disagreement. It's the transmission by these youngsters to this vulnerable group that causes spread of the disease and fatalities.
Last Edit: Jul 23, 2020 5:12:24 GMT -5 by paulie74
RF, not in disagreement. It's the transmission by these youngsters to this vulnerable group that causes spread of the disease and fatalities.
Yea, I agree. Without getting into the politics of this, I am opposed to cancelling college basketball because I feel it would have no impact on the mortality rate. You just need to keep the high risk individuals out of the stadiums. And out of nursing homes. If 80% of the deaths are nursing home patients it seems restricting visitors to nursing homes would be the number one thing to do to save lives versus cancelling college activities with primarily low risk individuals.
If u keep the “ high risk FF fans” as u say away from the home games you will have no fans at all at the home games.(lol) . Did u ever look around during a home game and see who makes up the majority of season ticket holders and home game regulars? N Most appear to be card carrying AARP members. On weekends when you mix in families into a home game crowd the dynamic changes, but that is the exception not the norm. One of FF main athletic priorities is to attract younger fans because the regular are getting a “ little long in the tooth” as we say.
If u keep the “ high risk FF fans” as u say away from the home games you will have no fans at all at the home games.(lol) . Did u ever look around during a home game and see who makes up the majority of season ticket holders and home game regulars? N Most appear to be card carrying AARP members. On weekends when you mix in families into a home game crowd the dynamic changes, but that is the exception not the norm. One of FF main athletic priorities is to attract younger fans because the regular are getting a “ little long in the tooth” as we say.
Yes, that is totally true. But I think we are naturally going to see lower attendence at any public events for the next 12 months, as there are many individuals that are either "high risk" or "high concern" that are simply going to stay away. And of course this should happen. But if they want to have games, at least students could go and perhaps we could watch them on TV.
The aging Fan base is a big problem for Fairfield. Big issue. Someone needs a vision to address this, I still doesn't see visionary leadership......
RF, not in disagreement. It's the transmission by these youngsters to this vulnerable group that causes spread of the disease and fatalities.
Yea, I agree. Without getting into the politics of this, I am opposed to cancelling college basketball because I feel it would have no impact on the mortality rate. You just need to keep the high risk individuals out of the stadiums. And out of nursing homes. If 80% of the deaths are nursing home patients it seems restricting visitors to nursing homes would be the number one thing to do to save lives versus cancelling college activities with primarily low risk individuals.
I guess we'll agree to disagree. Large indoor gatherings are super spreaders. Stags may be able to pull it off, but no way will it work with the major conferences IMO, especially in hot spots.