No fans at Penn State this season

[ClubSeats]

And on the flip side... there's this:

So same as last year?

 

[Yukonwreck]

"For the safety of the fans, we will only expose the players...I mean, student-athletes...to this virus."

Eloquently stated.

 

[gtGreg768b]

There's nothing wrong with flying. Everyone wears a mask, seats are spaced on the plane, and terminals are maybe 40% normal volume.



You know what? öööö it. Shut everything down. Leaving your house is an arrest-able offense.

At some point you have to stop being scared and go back to living. This isn't ebola. If you're old or have a condition, stay home. Everyone else get back to life.

Disagree with me? Then don't go to the game. But don't infringe on my right to go to the game, either.

Are you sure you have a PhD?

"I am sick of this coronavirus bullshit and all of the havoc it has wreaked" makes sense as a sentiment. "Let's just get back to normal and see what happens" is stupid, and it is why cases are rising. We are about to see what happens anyway, with schools reopening.

 

[zippyGT]

Are you sure you have a PhD?

"I am sick of this coronavirus bullshit and all of the havoc it has wreaked" makes sense as a sentiment. "Let's just get back to normal and see what happens" is stupid, and it is why cases are rising. We are about to see what happens anyway, with schools reopening.

I'm sure you don't since you have an issue with higher level reasoning.

Let me break it down for you: I'm making two separate but equally valid points:

• How you choose to protect yourself from the virus should be a personal choice. You can choose to go to the game or not go to the game. You can choose to wear a mask or not wear a mask. It should be up to the individual.
• How we respond should be different based on our situation. Elderly and those with co-morbidity should be treated differently than others.

There's a belief that we all need to react based on the lowest common denominator (the highest risk population) and that no matter the cost, it's worth it if we save 1 life (research shows that overreacting costs lives, too). Reaction should be smarter not just more conservative.

 

[gtGreg768b]

I'm sure you don't since you have an issue with high level reasoning.

Let me break it down for you: I'm making two separate but equally valid points:

• How you choose to protect yourself from the virus should be a personal choice. You can choose to go to the game or not go to the game. You can choose to wear a mask or not wear a mask. It should be up to the individual.
• How we respond should be different based on our situation. Elderly and those with co-morbidity should be treated differently than others.

There's a belief that we all need to react based on the lowest common denominator (the highest risk population) and that no matter the cost, it's worth it if we save 1 life (research shows that overreacting costs lives, too). Reaction should be smarter not just more conservative.

Ok. If you are still suggesting that wearing a mask at a game should be considered a matter of personal liberty, then we're definitely not going to get anywhere in this conversation. I'd be willing to bet you right now that if we do see fans this year at our games, the athletic association will have a better plan than "wear a mask if you feel that it is appropriate." GT is an institution of science, and hopefully our brass have enough intestinal fortitude to follow evidence-based public health recommendations rather than vague ideological pressures from the crew that thinks this is a hoax that will evaporate after the election. rules for attendance should be made to protect everyone who comes to the game, not just people who are fit.

 

[zippyGT]

GT is an institution of science, and hopefully our brass have enough intestinal fortitude to follow evidence-based public health recommendations...

The problem is that you don’t understand the argument others are making, which is why you feel so secure in your statements.

If the goal is to prevent everyone from getting sick, you’re right. But that was never the goal. Remember it was: “flatten the curve” not “eliminate the curve.” If the goal is to build herd immunity in a way that doesn’t overwhelm the medical system, your approach is wrong.

Why is my approach the better one? You only have a short time to contain (like S Korea). We’re beyond that in the US and have to strive for herd immunity.

Look at the New York positive test curve and compare that to the California curve. It’s not because New York is doing a better job of containment, it’s because NY has more herd immunity. Look at other states that had a big first wave and compare to those who didn’t.