Jump to content

Royalfan5

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    1,338
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Royalfan5

  1. Hopefully we can get to the point where everyone can recognize the fucked up structure of college football is the biggest roadblock towards moving ahead at this point. Hopefully it doesn't get replaced with something just as fucked up, like when the Red's replaced the Tsar's unitary monarchy. 

  2. 20 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

    No state bailouts!1!! 

     

    With the sudden manifestation of this right before the season started, there was surely nothing that could have been done. 

  3. 2 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

    Who else could get drafted at all in a reasonable position without a big next season?  I think that he is the extent of the list. 
    And- if college decides to play in the spring (they won’t) the nfl will surely push the draft back until after the season. They will want the tape and won’t want to take the injury risk. 

    Or they could do what baseball did and seriously shorten the draft and create a free agent free for all for the rest 

  4. Also at what point are we going to start seeing draconian budget cuts at the state and local level? The right wants to scream about defunding the police, but the economy is going to do that well before the left does. 

    • Hook 'Em 3
    • Like 3
  5. 1 minute ago, TXSG8R said:

    So raiding FEMA means we are going to have the biggest hurricane season on record, right?  

    They’ve already been talking about expecting to roll into Greek letters for storm names 

  6. 9 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

    Those schools will be the least receptive to a proposal that they increase their operating costs while giving half the revenue to the players.   They might even have a better argument for a force majeure claim with the lender depending on the loan agreement if there’s essentially a labor strike that makes football impossible.  Regardless, they’re only really losing if they thought the revenue would be substantial enough to cover the debt if they play, which probably isn’t the case if they can’t have fans at football games but still have to operate all their money losing sports.

    The court case on a labor strike by “amateurs” would be fascinating. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 1
  7. 2 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

    The players will fold.  They’ll have some way to save face and act like whatever fig leaf the schools give them really was a great deal, but ultimately (a) they want to play football and (b) they are the ones who stand to lose the most if they refuse to perform their side of the deal that got them into PAC 12 athletics in the first place.

    I mean, if there were ever a time when they could try to hold up the machine for some compensation it’s definitely now, but their problem is still ultimately that they need to play worse than the schools need them to play.  
     

    The extreme opening position might especially hurt them in this case, because like lots of businesses, I bet a lot of athletic departments probably would save more money if they have an excuse to cancel all sports instead of trying to go forward with only 25 % (or zero) paid attendance at games, reduced schedules that don’t fill up the usual tv contracts, etc.   If football is fucked this year anyway, then they definitely are better off pulling the plug on everything.   Don’t give them a reason.

    Except for schools that need revenue to service debt on CapEx. 

  8. At some point you’d think that going to an intramural and club sport model would serve the students of the university better rather than running two sports to fund other sports, which are made more expensive to run by being tied to those two sports. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
  9. 18 minutes ago, Grade of D as in David said:

    That's precisely why we're in this mess. People needed to get their hair and nails done and wanted to start shopping again. So we opened too soon and without enough testing capacity and poor contact tracing.

    So your solution is to open things up even more by sending kids to school? This isn't an oil well on fire that can be put out by blowing it up. We need to smother it by limiting contact.

    If you remember when everyone got Covid-19 in packing plants and meat prices got all fucky, remember that all those meat packing plant workers spent a lot of time shoulder to shoulder in sealed climate controlled facilities. Schools might not be as cold inside but there’s a lot of similarities in the amount of human contact. 

    • Like 2
  10. 5 minutes ago, Foosters said:

    This isn't Texas related, but wanted to let you guys know that you're not alone. It's a nation-wide urban vs. rural split. 

    I drove through CA recently and stopped in a few small towns to get gas. Not a single mask in any of the stores I went in despite every store having a "mask required" on the door.

    I say this as someone who grew up in, and works extensively with rural Americans, it’s because they’ve had smoke blown up their asses their whole lives that being rural is being a purer American than anyone else, and thus stuff doesn’t apply to them. 

    • Like 5
  11. 12 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

    Here's a sympathetic voice: it's fucking hard, and it's a hard call.

    Kids NEED in-person schooling.  There seems to be no doubt that it's helpful to most kids both academically and socially, and losing a large block of it can have serious negative effects, including over the long term.

    But beyond the health of the kids themselves, there's the health of the teachers and staff to account for, as well as the families those kids will go home to every day.

    It's a complicated fucking problem, with a lot of unbalanced risk-reward calculations along the way.

    I don't know what the right call is.  I really don't.

    Grade School kids will get good and fucked up too if they teacher dies from something that was spread in their classroom too. 

    • Like 3
Ă—
Ă—
  • Create New...