• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

Gundy again called out

Bleed Red

Red Shirt
5 Year Member
I saw that OSU HC Mike Gundy had a news conference yesterday and was being blasted for his stance on the Covid-19 outbreak and response. Definitely ruffled a few feathers with his ideas of bringing players back to campus and getting things back to a more normal state in a very short amount of time.

I'm a big fan of "herd immunity" which is one of the things he was proposing so i don't think he was totally off base, but it does show that the mainstream media are NOT open to any sort of message that seems to put more people in danger. Also that they aren't afraid to call out anyone, whether doctor, politician or football coach who says something that isn't a message being driven by the media as a whole.
 

CrabHusker

It rubs the lotion on its skin.
5 Year Member
I saw that OSU HC Mike Gundy had a news conference yesterday and was being blasted for his stance on the Covid-19 outbreak and response. Definitely ruffled a few feathers with his ideas of bringing players back to campus and getting things back to a more normal state in a very short amount of time.

I'm a big fan of "herd immunity" which is one of the things he was proposing so i don't think he was totally off base, but it does show that the mainstream media are NOT open to any sort of message that seems to put more people in danger. Also that they aren't afraid to call out anyone, whether doctor, politician or football coach who says something that isn't a message being driven by the media as a whole.
There are two questions I think come to mind and neither of them can be answered today, if ever, so it's hard to make a decision for or against lifting the restrictions.

So the question really is how long has the virus been here and how wide spread was it prior to the start of 'Universal precautions' and 'Social distancing'? If less than half of the population had been exposed to it when things started exploding in March, it's safe to say the things put in place have made a marked impact and we can't ignore their importance in keeping the death toll down. If more than half had been exposed prior to March and the cat was already out of the bag so to speak, we're doing most of this for nothing. Isolate and protect the most likely to be impacted by the virus and carry on.

At this point the only really logical thing to do is back off of the restrictions when the hospitalizations start to drop. We're going to be testing more and more people every single day for the foreseeable future, so we could still see a rise in positives, but not in hospitalizations. If all the major indicators go down, it's a no brainer. Things have to go back to whatever the new normal will be sooner than later. If that's the end of April, awesome. If it's the end of May....not nearly as awesome. By July we better be talking about the holdovers present in daily life and not the lingering lockdown.
 

Elwood von Kiowa

Grad Assistant
5 Year Member
I saw that OSU HC Mike Gundy had a news conference yesterday and was being blasted for his stance on the Covid-19 outbreak and response. Definitely ruffled a few feathers with his ideas of bringing players back to campus and getting things back to a more normal state in a very short amount of time.

I'm a big fan of "herd immunity" which is one of the things he was proposing so i don't think he was totally off base, but it does show that the mainstream media are NOT open to any sort of message that seems to put more people in danger. Also that they aren't afraid to call out anyone, whether doctor, politician or football coach who says something that isn't a message being driven by the media as a whole.
You MUST step in line with the MSM party line, or risk social disgrace!
 

Bleed Red

Red Shirt
5 Year Member
There are two questions I think come to mind and neither of them can be answered today, if ever, so it's hard to make a decision for or against lifting the restrictions.

So the question really is how long has the virus been here and how wide spread was it prior to the start of 'Universal precautions' and 'Social distancing'? If less than half of the population had been exposed to it when things started exploding in March, it's safe to say the things put in place have made a marked impact and we can't ignore their importance in keeping the death toll down. If more than half had been exposed prior to March and the cat was already out of the bag so to speak, we're doing most of this for nothing. Isolate and protect the most likely to be impacted by the virus and carry on.

At this point the only really logical thing to do is back off of the restrictions when the hospitalizations start to drop. We're going to be testing more and more people every single day for the foreseeable future, so we could still see a rise in positives, but not in hospitalizations. If all the major indicators go down, it's a no brainer. Things have to go back to whatever the new normal will be sooner than later. If that's the end of April, awesome. If it's the end of May....not nearly as awesome. By July we better be talking about the holdovers present in daily life and not the lingering lockdown.
I can't for a moment believe the exposure prior to the implementation of social distancing, etc. was anywhere close to 50%. I would actually guess that we are still well below that exposure level in most, if not all locations.
 

CrabHusker

It rubs the lotion on its skin.
5 Year Member
Gundy is more than entitled to his opinion, as we all are. But I'll side with experts in the field of epidemiology regarding the COVID situation, and consult a FB coach when the matter involves X's and O's.
So it's really a conversation between healthcare/epidemiology experts and economic experts, isn't it? At a certain point the stifling the economy to save lives stance we're talking now will do more harm than good. There may be a legitimate argument made to loosen restrictions prior to eradicating the virus. Let me correct that. There HAS to be a lessening of restrictions prior to eradicating the virus. Maybe that's 3 weeks maybe it's 3 months. I don't know. I don't feel comfortable listening to a epidemiologist as the sole basis for all of my decision making process if I'm the guy pulling the trigger on this. Does that make sense?
 

HuskerFaith

Recruit
So it's really a conversation between healthcare/epidemiology experts and economic experts, isn't it? At a certain point the stifling the economy to save lives stance we're talking now will do more harm than good. There may be a legitimate argument made to loosen restrictions prior to eradicating the virus. Let me correct that. There HAS to be a lessening of restrictions prior to eradicating the virus. Maybe that's 3 weeks maybe it's 3 months. I don't know. I don't feel comfortable listening to a epidemiologist as the sole basis for all of my decision making process if I'm the guy pulling the trigger on this. Does that make sense?
Yes Dr Fauci Is a “by the book” researcher. He is constantly saying that it won’t get normal and safe around the country until there is a vaccine or at least an effective treatment. And THAT‘s just the type of guy we need on the task force. But what he is describing is the IDEAL situation and of course it’s true. But as you stated there has to be a trade off. I would NOT want to be the one to make that decision..... tough call.
Lets just hope that they get the anti-body test going so we can test that theory on how many have actually contracted the virus without getting symptoms. That will indeed help in the decisions regarding getting back to work.
 

Elwood von Kiowa

Grad Assistant
5 Year Member
Gundy is more than entitled to his opinion, as we all are. But I'll side with experts in the field of epidemiology regarding the COVID situation, and consult a FB coach when the matter involves X's and O's.
If there's one thing that can be clearly demonstrated by watching current events, it's that "experts" can be wrong, and frequently are.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying let's go have a rave (and blatantly disregarding social distancing recommendations shows a clear lack of wisdom). But the models have, understandably, overestimated the results. It's fair to begin discussing when and how our lives should get back to normal.
 

CrabHusker

It rubs the lotion on its skin.
5 Year Member
Yes Dr Fauci Is a “by the book” researcher. He is constantly saying that it won’t get normal and safe around the country until there is a vaccine or at least an effective treatment. And THAT‘s just the type of guy we need on the task force. But what he is describing is the IDEAL situation and of course it’s true. But as you stated there has to be a trade off. I would NOT want to be the one to make that decision..... tough call.
Lets just hope that they get the anti-body test going so we can test that theory on how many have actually contracted the virus without getting symptoms. That will indeed help in the decisions regarding getting back to work.
Absolutely. Tough decisions all the way around that will affect everyone's life, not just those who contract the virus.

The medical component is looking at it from almost entirely that perspective while the economist has to be doing something similar from their end of the spectrum. They have to consider each others input and ultimately it will be the President's decision.

I'm not comfortable pulling the band aid off at this point and I hope the same can be said for our elected officials. Should really be a week to week evaluation and I am almost positive any reversal of the restrictions will be in a rolling fashion, since the virus and resultant restrictions moved in the same fashion.
 

berryhusker

Travel Squad
15 Year Member
So it's really a conversation between healthcare/epidemiology experts and economic experts, isn't it? At a certain point the stifling the economy to save lives stance we're talking now will do more harm than good. There may be a legitimate argument made to loosen restrictions prior to eradicating the virus. Let me correct that. There HAS to be a lessening of restrictions prior to eradicating the virus. Maybe that's 3 weeks maybe it's 3 months. I don't know. I don't feel comfortable listening to a epidemiologist as the sole basis for all of my decision making process if I'm the guy pulling the trigger on this. Does that make sense?
I agree, there definitely is a balance that needs to be recognized. I don't have the answers and I'm glad I'm not the one having to pull the trigger on this as well. Gundy is entitled to his position and he may be 100% spot on. His voice carries more weight but I just don't value a coach's opinion on this over some better-informed professionals is all.
 
Top