If you can't source medical material describing how and why respiratory viruses are most harmful to those with compromised immune systems I'm not gonna spoon feed you. It's out there and has been for years. This is nothing new.
B1G Football is BACK! 9 (8+1) Games in 9 Week Window w/ Oct 23/24 Start Date, which is Crucial w/ Dec 19 B1G Title Game & CFP Teams Revealed Dec 20
- Thread starter Franisdaman
- Start date
If you can't source medical material describing how and why respiratory viruses are most harmful to those with compromised immune systems I'm not gonna spoon feed you. It's out there and has been for years. This is nothing new.
Maybe instead of taking out that $75 million loan, Iowa should take this route instead.
Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost believes Ohio State can sue Big Ten over football cancellation
By Randy Ludlow
The Columbus Dispatch
Posted at 5:47 PMUpdated at 6:08 PM
Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost is ready to recommend that Ohio State University officials file a lawsuit seeking monetary damages from the Big Ten and member schools that voted against playing football this autumn.
A team of state lawyers studying Ohio State’s contracts with the Big Ten believe an “excellent contract claim for several tens of millions of dollars in lost revenue” can be demanded in a lawsuit, Yost told The Dispatch.
Yost, a Republican, said he has not yet discussed the filing of a potential state-court action against the Big Ten and some of its schools with Ohio State officials as conference talks continue on when -- and if -- to play football amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
“I think we have a cause of action” for violating contracts between the Big Ten and Ohio State and for illegal interference in a business relationship, Yost said.
“If these negotiations (over playing football) fall apart, we will be recommending legal action to our client, Ohio State University,” he said, adding his office believes the Big Ten lacked legal authority to cancel or delay the football season.
Big Ten presidents and chancellors voted 11-3 to not immediately play football due to the coronavirus pandemic, with only Ohio State, Iowa and Nebraska voting in favor of playing despite the COVID pandemic.
Yost, an Ohio State journalism graduate, said he has directed his lawyers to “put together a case, so if negotiations break down and the season is canceled, we are prepared to make a presentation to the board (of trustees) and the administration.”
Comment was being sought Wednesday evening from Ohio State University officials, including Athletic director Gene Smith.
A Big Ten decision to begin playing football later would cancel talk of a lawsuit, Yost said, although he expressed doubts about the conference’s legal ability to cancel non-conference games.
Asked about the possibility of pursuing a lawsuit against the Mid-American Conference over its football season cancellation, Yost said that would be examined if member schools express interest.
Ohio public universities Ohio, Toledo, Akron, Bowling Green, Kent State and Miami play football in the MAC. They also play football games against Big Ten opponents and rely on revenue sharing from those games.
Dave Yost believes Ohio State can sue Big Ten over football cancellation
Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost is ready to recommend that Ohio State University officials file a lawsuit seeking monetary damages from the Big Ten andwww.dispatch.com
Good man from OSU!
Exactly. Two weeks ago, 11,400 young healthy people died. I don't know what the latest figure is. But there's no guarantee Covid will be easy or mild for the young and healthy.
thats not what was said. A 55 year old surviving cancer doesn't fall into either of those categories. The categories again were a median age of death of 78 and approximately 50% of the deaths coming from nursing homes. But a nice try of spinning the facts Mr. Progressive!
They would rather have thousands and thousands more lives destroyed by business failures. People with conditions as stated already know during flu season they have to isolate or they risk bad complications from flu. Any chemo patient knows this. A bad cold could kill them.
I am waiting for them to propose a national 10mph speed limit. Would save probably 30,000 lives a year every single year.
I don't know where you got that number. A quick visit to the CDC website will show you that it's not remotely close to accurate. Might be a good opportunity to re-evaluate your sources.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm
Last edited:
Are you really this big of a liar?
this is interesting. when you read a statement like this, it is obviously taken as hyperbole........but if you think for a minute, would a 10 (or even 25) mph speed limit on all roads mess with our society anymore than shutting everything down has?
would save a lot of lives.
Just less free time since would take longer in transit. I am about 95% certain Elon Musk and all will figure out the driverless car deal and in 20 years probably majority will drive themselves and you can sleep or do whatever in the car. Assume you will just punch up a demand for a vehicle and it shows up at your location. At that point cars could go faster.
I don't really care if they play this year or not. It isn't going to be a normal season and really now it just seems like they are trying to get something that gets OSU to the playoffs as opposed to doing something that is best for all teams.
Time is money.
Were you alive during the 55 mph speed limit fiasco? The government tried for decades to bludgeon the American public into compliance with a 55 mph speed mandate, The American public rejected it by continuing to speed and the forced compliance created a lot animosity.
Reminds me of a lot of things the government tries to do that the American public rejects. Eventually the government came to their senses and backed off the national speed limit mandate...22 years later. Oh, and about how it was all about safety, a 2009 study, where they were thinking about forcing 55 mph back on us again, concluded that fatalities went up a mere 3.8%. 3.8%, we have shut the country down over a much lower number.
yeah I was around. I wasn’t driving yet, but I remember traveling interstate at that speed.
just interesting what people will go to battle for.
You made my point. There has always been a trade off between lives and money or time. I get your numbers too, but if the speed limit were 10mph it would be hard to fathom how anyone would die in a traffic accident. Suppose there would still be some somehow, but it would not be the 30k to 40k that we have annually now. What I was getting at is that we trade lives for money and time every single year in many other aspects of life. I was trying to illustrate that with this that it could easily save almost every life we lose in traffic deaths annually just by slowing it way way down, but we don't and why don't we. The corona bros don't even give an answer, they just say well traffic accidents are not contagious to make it sound like it is a stupid comparison when in fact it is not. It is about the trade off in risk of life / money / and time. They talk about people risking the lives of others, when in fact we do that every time we get in a car and travel. They are called accidents because they aren't planned, but that doesn't mean you or I or anyone else won't kill someone behind the wheel.
About 20 years ago or so, Montana had a "Any prudent speed" limit on I90. Drove out there then and we were driving maybe 90mph and would get flown by many times by other cars. Its not that now. Not sure why it changed but guessing a few bad accidents must have happened from people doing really stupid stuff.
Yes. This is at the crux of the issue. The response to COVID (and any other health issue) is a public health issue, which is always an issue of balancing risk vs the cost of restricting others' freedoms and liberties against that risk. It's why traffic accidents are "accepted" (not really accepted, but viewed as the cost of living in a modern society that allows for freedom of movement and transport of goods and services) as part of life. It's why historically there hasn't been mass cancellation of schools, events, etc. during cold and flu season in the winter. Even though thousands of people due each year either directly from influenza or existing medical conditions that are exacerbated by influenza. It's been calculated that the cost to society in closing stuff down was not worth the lives lost due to cold/flu season. That doesn't mean that people don't care about life, but it's a reality of a functioning society. "If it saves one life" is not a reason to do something drastic. In fact, it's often a very bad set of reasoning that can lead to many more lives being lost.
my hot take: if everyone traveled the speed limit, which is the speed the roadway is designed for, we'd have fewer deaths as well. Speeding above the design speed and distracted driving are the problems.
We do a lot to mitigate the dangers of traffic accidents. Safer vehicles, safer roads. It would be far more dangerous if we didn't regulate not only driver behavior but roadway design.
A big part of the problem is set forth in the first article: "There are many sub-committees involved." What's needed is some strong centralized leadership with a free hand to get the information that is needed and recommend a decision (one way or the other) to the conference members without further delay. Thus far the conference process resembles an episode of the "Keystone Cops" (with apologies for the reference, to those less than 100 years old).
Isn't the centralized leader supposed to be the commissioner? Maybe he still prefers that they don't play, so is just letting all this play out. The ole "you guys figure it out" leadership.
Sure, as well as stopping at stop signs / lights, not trying to pass when not clear. My guess is falling asleep at the wheel is a big one as still probably intoxication. Weather would be a biggie and people even driving the speed limit when weather is not desirable.
The people that drive 10 or more miles under the speed limit also cause accidents and deaths.
Intersections are being redesigned (usually as roundabouts) to make them safer. I don't know of any regulatory changes coming soon for passing zones, but perhaps those should be evaluated as well.
We were saying the same thing BTW. The trade offs we make in life.
Was driving through Montana last spring and was going 92, still getting passed going 92. Just because they instituted an 80 mph speed limit does not mean anything changed, which kind of proves my point again. Montanans driving habits did not change just because they instituted a speed limit.
Oh, and while going 92 I went right by more than a few HiPo's, they didn't even flinch.
I don't want to debate politics or Covid anymore. Most people have dug into how they feel, and no amount of data is going to change their opinions. So many fake stories on both sides. I just want to watch some f'ing Big 10 football. Hoping the October thing is real.
Yep, different kind of mindset out there with such vast distances of next to nothing. Gun racks up in the back windows of pickups and all.
A
anon_b29nm7v7dwp6r
Guest
I am rather enjoying seeing these media types like Rittenberg, who have been running with complete fake news reports that the big ten was reconsidering, get all frustrated.
Do your homework folks. Big Ten hasn’t said anything indicating this will be changed.
Do your homework folks. Big Ten hasn’t said anything indicating this will be changed.
A
anon_b29nm7v7dwp6r
Guest
Wish wish wish away. Until Kevin Warren announces a schedule you’re wasting your time with fake news....
A
anon_b29nm7v7dwp6r
Guest
