Reading between lines, expect fans to be present?

golfing18now

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2013
Messages
1,875
Reaction score
354
Points
83
WTF? Why are abortion clinics mixed in with gun shops and weed/liquor stores?? Wow. Is womens' health not essential? Are women supposed to stop having the right to choose during the pandemic?

This is one of the strangest examples I've seen on this board and my mind won't stop racing trying to figure out your thought process here.

PS. Marijuana is approved for some level of medical use in most states in the country. Many people rely on it for help with PTSD, anxiety, depression, pain, etc, so cutting off peoples' access would be like closing a pharmacy. I know a lot of antiquated people have a hard time understanding marijuana is actually a BETTER alternative in many cases than prescription drugs, but it's being proven each day for people whose lives its improving.
WriterGoph -- my inclusion of those items was intended to avoid exactly the type of response I got from you. I was not trying to make a political argument about any of those items. I explicitly included items on both ends of the political spectrum to avoid the usual "right wing nut job" comment that so many posts solicit on this board. If you think recreational weed dispenseries are "essential" despite the majority of the States in this country not having them, then so be it. It wasn't my point. I'll cede your point on abortion clinics.

My frustration since day one of this COVID response is items A, B, and C have been allowed but items D, E, and F have not been allowed <-----is that better, WriterGoph? despite what I believe has been a very random and political determination since the very onset.
 

GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
25,762
Reaction score
1,230
Points
113
This one is pretty interesting.

If you follow the link it also says this below the chart: "As more deaths are registered, the mortality rates for leading causes of death will change, so the provisional death occurrences data should be interpreted with caution."

 

WriterGoph

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
2,961
Reaction score
1,118
Points
113
WriterGoph -- my inclusion of those items was intended to avoid exactly the type of response I got from you. I was not trying to make a political argument about any of those items. I explicitly included items on both ends of the political spectrum to avoid the usual "right wing nut job" comment that so many posts solicit on this board. If you think recreational weed dispenseries are "essential" despite the majority of the States in this country not having them, then so be it. It wasn't my point. I'll cede your point on abortion clinics.

My frustration since day one of this COVID response is items A, B, and C have been allowed but items D, E, and F have not been allowed <-----is that better, WriterGoph? despite what I believe has been a very random and political determination since the very onset.
that

Sure, that's better. I just thought the abortion clinics stuck out, but I understand your intention now.

And you also didn't specify recreational vs. medical dispensaries in your OP. But that also depends on what state you're in. I am in Colorado, so peoples' overall perspective on not being able to get rec weed is VASTLY different than most states. For example, when the Denver mayor initially announced that liquor stores and recreational MJ dispensaries would NOT be "essential" businesses and would NOT remain open during the lockdown, it caused a major reaction and thousands rushed out to the stores to try and buy before the 3pm deadline. There were tons of helicopter shots of lines going blocks long with people in the city. Obviously in March - during stay at home orders - this was not a good outcome for social distancing. Hence, the mayor quickly reversed the decision for the sake of public health.

So, while many can argue the morality of alcohol and weed being considered "essential", COVID can't change the truths about what people have developed a physical/psychological reliance on.
 

PitinoFan

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,037
Reaction score
1,493
Points
113
If you follow the link it also says this below the chart: "As more deaths are registered, the mortality rates for leading causes of death will change, so the provisional death occurrences data should be interpreted with caution."

Oh, you mean the chart that MplsGopher called “fake” includes an official link to a UK Government website? Interesting. My guess is many June deaths were inaccurately classified as “from” Covid” as opposed to “with” Covid. The disclaimer actually helps make that case.

 
Last edited:

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
14,349
Reaction score
2,040
Points
113
Oh, you mean the chart that MplsGopher called “fake” includes an official link to a UK Government website? Interesting. My guess is many June deaths were classified as “from” Covid” as opposed to “with” Covid. The disclaimer actually helps make that case.

Why not just look at excess deaths in the UK? To see if more people have died this year than normal??

Actually, the second tweet you posted does just that for Europe, and confirms the actual story.
 

GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
25,762
Reaction score
1,230
Points
113
Oh, you mean the chart that MplsGopher called “fake” includes an official link to a UK Government website? Interesting. My guess is many June deaths were classified as “from” Covid” as opposed to “with” Covid. The disclaimer actually helps make that case.

There's also a May report that shows some things are above normal and some are below. It's interesting, I just don't know how much we can draw from it from just looking at one month. The whole year would make more sense IMO.
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 21, 2015
Messages
14,480
Reaction score
1,582
Points
113
There's also a May report that shows some things are above normal and some are below. It's interesting, I just don't know how much we can draw from it from just looking at one month. The whole year would make more sense IMO.
It has been challenge from the start.

Scientific knowledge about disease / epidemics takes the 10,000 feet view and decades of research, review, re-review, new theories tested and etc.

Along comes something new and we're just trying to figure it out as we go.

I look forward to finding out what is going on / what would / wouldn't work for sure in ... 3 years or so.
 

PitinoFan

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,037
Reaction score
1,493
Points
113
I think the death knell has probably already sounded. But they're not going to make any hard decisions until the last possible second, with regards to football.
Based on that, I’m going to go ahead and predict there will be a season in some form. It may be delayed, shortened even more, whatever. They will try.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
14,349
Reaction score
2,040
Points
113
Based on that, I’m going to go ahead and predict there will be a season in some form. It may be delayed, shortened even more, whatever. They will try.
I think you're more likely to be correct than wrong.

Same for the NFL. They will try.
 

WriterGoph

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
2,961
Reaction score
1,118
Points
113
Maybe not death knell, but I feel the season is on life support.
I guess the fact that dorms are still open for students means some students will still be on campus though. But this is looking more and more like spring football
 

PitinoFan

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,037
Reaction score
1,493
Points
113
I think you're more likely to be correct than wrong.

Same for the NFL. They will try.
They have to try. There’s way too much money at stake. If the Stanford professor is correct, that it will be mostly over in 4 weeks, there will be evidence of that soon. We can already see that Florida and Texas have peaked. I know about the deaths increasing, but they obviously lag, so those should start falling in the near future, assuming new infections and hospitalizations continue to drop. There are a few other states behind Texas and Florida, but they’ll hit their peaks soon, if they haven’t already. Playing college football in empty stadiums isn’t going to contribute to the spread. Sure, there are legitimate safety concerns for some staff members, and perhaps players with pre-existing conditions. Those can be dealt with without canceling the entire season.
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
9,434
Reaction score
1,061
Points
113
On whether there is football, I think it comes down to this:

are the Power 5 conferences willing to go it alone? the D3 and D2 schools are pulling the plug on fall sports. I would guess the next domino will be the smaller D1 conferences.

and that will leave the Power 5 conferences on an island. Will the desire to keep the TV money outweigh any negative publicity from trying to play while other schools are canceling or re-scheduling games for the Spring?

Heard another interview with Kevin Warren. same story - they hope to play if it's safe. But who determines whether it's safe?

("Is it safe?" - "Marathon Man" - worst dentist torture scene ever)
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
14,349
Reaction score
2,040
Points
113
They have to try. There’s way too much money at stake. If the Stanford professor is correct, that it will be mostly over in 4 weeks, there will be evidence of that soon. We can already see that Florida and Texas have peaked. I know about the deaths increasing, but they obviously lag, so those should start falling in the near future, assuming new infections and hospitalizations continue to drop. There are a few other states behind Texas and Florida, but they’ll hit their peaks soon, if they haven’t already. Playing college football in empty stadiums isn’t going to contribute to the spread. Sure, there are legitimate safety concerns for some staff members, and perhaps players with pre-existing conditions. Those can be dealt with without canceling the entire season.
As I said, the data/line being used in that very conveniently stops at June 20th, which is just the perfect cutoff to exclude the recent trend upwards in deaths.

Don’t get me wrong, mid to late June, things were looking relatively good in deaths.


Playing in empty stadiums won’t contribute much to the spread, but hats not the concern. Protecting players and staff from infection is. Pros is one thing, but you can’t mandate college kids into a bubble. And even the bubbles don’t work.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
44,413
Reaction score
2,884
Points
113
On whether there is football, I think it comes down to this:

are the Power 5 conferences willing to go it alone? the D3 and D2 schools are pulling the plug on fall sports. I would guess the next domino will be the smaller D1 conferences.

and that will leave the Power 5 conferences on an island. Will the desire to keep the TV money outweigh any negative publicity from trying to play while other schools are canceling or re-scheduling games for the Spring?

Heard another interview with Kevin Warren. same story - they hope to play if it's safe. But who determines whether it's safe?

("Is it safe?" - "Marathon Man" - worst dentist torture scene ever)
I suspect they will kick the can until October and see how it goes for MLB/NFL.
 

PitinoFan

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,037
Reaction score
1,493
Points
113
On the bright side, students will be on campus. This isn’t going to be like this past Spring. Actually, it will make it easier for athletes to socially distance themselves. Let’s see if they can control themselves for a few months. Focus on school and football. Parties and getting laid can wait.

———-

Most classes at the University of Minnesota will be taught fully online this fall, even as the school reopens its dormitories, dining halls and campus spaces under some social distancing restrictions.

Of the roughly 8,900 fall classes scheduled so far at the Twin Cities campus, about 70% were slated to be delivered online, according to the U. The rest will be taught either in person or in a hybrid manner, which includes a mix of online and face-to-face instruction.

 

PMWinSTP

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 11, 2015
Messages
9,142
Reaction score
492
Points
83
They have to try. There’s way too much money at stake. If the Stanford professor is correct, that it will be mostly over in 4 weeks, there will be evidence of that soon. We can already see that Florida and Texas have peaked. I know about the deaths increasing, but they obviously lag, so those should start falling in the near future, assuming new infections and hospitalizations continue to drop. There are a few other states behind Texas and Florida, but they’ll hit their peaks soon, if they haven’t already. Playing college football in empty stadiums isn’t going to contribute to the spread. Sure, there are legitimate safety concerns for some staff members, and perhaps players with pre-existing conditions. Those can be dealt with without canceling the entire season.
Maybe look at his March predictions.
 

Ope3

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
1,519
Reaction score
248
Points
63
With regards to this original post and title, the verdict is now in. No. However, it was good to have a glimmer of hope.

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies."
- Andy Dufresne
 
Top Bottom