Possible cold water season football season thread

[jdhawk]

Christ on a bike you and others are misinformed. He’s quoting a formal OSU study, not anecdotal experience. Please read before posting dumb stuff.

Look I get it, you want your football. You and others need to read up more before posting stupid things.

The Big Ten, PAC 12 and Ivy League have absolutely NO vested interest in cancelling football. Football brings them a $#@t ton of money. Why would you guys ever believe there’s some bizarro conspiracy to deliberately lose billions of dollars for these conferences? That’s so odd to me.

The fact is there is very concerning medical data showing these players are at high risk and kids could die.

The conspiracy theory is why the SEC, Big12 and ACC are instead playing for the money grab.

I am sure the feigned outrage makes you feel better but you are the one that defended the 30-35% by claiming he was talking about his institution (remember emphasizing OUR and WE?). You said it was a “sampling of a single institution.” He later admitted there were zero cases at his institution. Not 35%, not 15% but 0% at his institution.

 

[SPOONER]

What? The Big10 is not the only league. Last I checked the Ivy League and PAC 10 weren’t moving forward.

So the leaders of the medical schools at the following schools think it’s a bad idea: Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Northwestern, Cal -Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan, Columbia, Penn, Wisconsin, Iowa, etc think it’s a bad idea. I could go on and on.

Tons of people in leadership have viewed real data and are very concerned.

Link to the leader of each medical school saying it is a bad idea?

It’s pretty telling that you keep citing and defending the PSU doc even after his comments have shown to be COMPLETELY false and firmly retracted. A normal person would say “my bad” and then be pleased that the panic was for nothing. I’d say it was amazing but I’ve “known” you for a long time so it isn’t shocking in the least.

 

[rabid goat]

Christ on a bike you and others are misinformed. He’s quoting a formal OSU study, not anecdotal experience. Please read before posting dumb stuff.

Look I get it, you want your football. You and others need to read up more before posting stupid things.

The Big Ten, PAC 12 and Ivy League have absolutely NO vested interest in cancelling football. Football brings them a $#@t ton of money. Why would you guys ever believe there’s some bizarro conspiracy to deliberately lose billions of dollars for these conferences? That’s so odd to me.

The fact is there is very concerning medical data showing these players are at high risk and kids could die.

The conspiracy theory is why the SEC, Big12 and ACC are instead playing for the money grab.

Where are all the kids dying over the last six months from this?

 

[rabid goat]

Which I cited before you and others did. Yes it’s 15%, not sure if he misspoke, or was deliberately misleading or just misinformed. It’s still too high of a number.

Regardless, 15 % is a high rate for for a significant cardiac issue.

So would you allow your kid to play in a sport right now where “ A recent study in JAMA reported evidence of CTE in 110 of 111 deceased retired NFL players who donated their brains for posthumous examination” and carries a 15% rate of cardiomyopathy?

Let’s talk about some things that are true regardless of your hysterical view of Covid.

First, as you well know, myocarditis is associated with many different viral infections, not just covid.

Second, the presence of post-viral myocarditis in otherwise healthy people is almost always temporary and only rarely causes long term harm.

Third, there is one observational study that purports to make findings of a higher incidence of myocarditis associated with covid in young people than other viruses.

Fourth, it is not the standard of care to administer MRIs to healthy asymptomatic people who have had viruses other than covid so we have no idea whether the inflammation shown in some of these athletes post covid is an expected temporary outcome after the immune system has warded off a viral infection.

Fifth, there is no other sports league, college or pro, anywhere that has reported an experience with a unusually high incidence of inflammation around the heart with their players who have had covid.

Sixth, as with almost all other known viruses, Covid has proven proficient at harming and killing people who are overwhelmingly frail or unhealthy and has caused statistically almost zero harm to college aged people.

I am wondering what validity you give to the NYT article from this weekend reporting that as much as 90 percent of the PCR covid tests are false positives due to the sensitivity settings. Are you willing to accept that likelihood or does that burst your covid bubble too much?

 

[rabid goat]

Christ on a bike you and others are misinformed. He’s quoting a formal OSU study, not anecdotal experience. Please read before posting dumb stuff.

Look I get it, you want your football. You and others need to read up more before posting stupid things.

The Big Ten, PAC 12 and Ivy League have absolutely NO vested interest in cancelling football. Football brings them a $#@t ton of money. Why would you guys ever believe there’s some bizarro conspiracy to deliberately lose billions of dollars for these conferences? That’s so odd to me.

The fact is there is very concerning medical data showing these players are at high risk and kids could die.

The conspiracy theory is why the SEC, Big12 and ACC are instead playing for the money grab.

If these players are at “high risk” and “could die” as you say, why haven’t large numbers of young people been dying all over the world the last six months from heart issues? Why have all the sports leagues that have been practicing and playing all over the country and world from little league to NBA, to NFL, to European soccer etc. not been having players dropping dead, or been sidelined with heart problems? Just your common sense and not your emotions.

 

[BXY]

 

[rabid goat]

Christ on a bike you and others are misinformed. He’s quoting a formal OSU study, not anecdotal experience. Please read before posting dumb stuff.

Look I get it, you want your football. You and others need to read up more before posting stupid things.

The Big Ten, PAC 12 and Ivy League have absolutely NO vested interest in cancelling football. Football brings them a $#@t ton of money. Why would you guys ever believe there’s some bizarro conspiracy to deliberately lose billions of dollars for these conferences? That’s so odd to me.

The fact is there is very concerning medical data showing these players are at high risk and kids could die.

The conspiracy theory is why the SEC, Big12 and ACC are instead playing for the money grab.

This is a nonsensical question. But, it perfectly illustrates the point I have been making. We let players decide to assume the risk for CTE, spinal injuries, and repetitive trauma to joints but we draw the line at letting them assume the risk of getting a virus that is less lethal to that age group than influenza? Do you see how absurd that is?

 

[hbutler2]

The thing that sucks about this is it grabbed headlines and some people never bother to move past headlines. Drudge report still has a headline saying "Football doc: 30% of positive Big Ten athletes had myocarditis..."

The article is updated if people bother clicking on it but something dumb said by someone who should know better will stick with certain types of people.

 

[L. Wade Childress]

Christ on a bike you and others are misinformed. He’s quoting a formal OSU study, not anecdotal experience. Please read before posting dumb stuff.

Look I get it, you want your football. You and others need to read up more before posting stupid things.

The Big Ten, PAC 12 and Ivy League have absolutely NO vested interest in cancelling football. Football brings them a $#@t ton of money. Why would you guys ever believe there’s some bizarro conspiracy to deliberately lose billions of dollars for these conferences? That’s so odd to me.

The fact is there is very concerning medical data showing these players are at high risk and kids could die.

The conspiracy theory is why the SEC, Big12 and ACC are instead playing for the money grab.

Athletics don’t really make any schools any money.

 

[h-hawk]

Wow-Penn St traditionally does a great job of screening their job applicants.....not.

 

[SWIowahawks]

Periods (and commas) should appear inside of quote marks.

Is that how being an asswipe is supposed to work? Got to be exhausting for you.

Oh wait, I forgot, right, I’m supposed to add the childish smack talk as well.

I guess you are too incredibly stupid, having been dropped on your head at birth.

No. When being an “asswipe”, you should be correct in what you’re being an “asswipe” about. Much like the PSU Doctor, please retract your original false statements.

 

[lumuhawk]

No. When being an “asswipe”, you should be correct in what you’re being an “asswipe” about. Much like the PSU Doctor, please retract your original false statements.

Commas are supposed to be inside quote marks.

 

[BuildemHawk]

This is a classic case of confirmation bias. Look at the people who globbed onto this as truth, and even still hang onto it desperately even though the guy admitted to lying about the numbers. Some want this to be true, so they accept it as truth no matter what.

 

[dandh]

Periods (and commas) should appear inside of quote marks.

Is that how being an asswipe is supposed to work? Got to be exhausting for you.

Oh wait, I forgot, right, I’m supposed to add the childish smack talk as well.

I guess you are too incredibly stupid, having been dropped on your head at birth.

Not always, and not in this case. I hate to defend L12, but his usage is correct.

 

[dandh]

Commas are supposed to be inside quote marks.

You seem to have missed a few lessons in 8th grade English class. His usage is correct.

 

[rabid goat]

This is a classic case of confirmation bias. Look at the people who globbed onto this as truth, and even still hang onto it desperately even though the guy admitted to lying about the numbers. Some want this to be true, so they accept it as truth no matter what.

I'd like to know and maybe @torbee can tell us how the Penn State doctors statements so infiltrated the media who ran with it like crazy only to find out he was repeating, inaccurately, something that someone had told him that they had read. Is that supposed to be how journalism works?

 

[Legend12]

You seem to have missed a few lessons in 8th grade English class. His usage is correct.

No, he is correct, but my way of protesting that idiotic rule of language is to always put the punctuation outside of the quotation mark. Some day, when my way is accepted as it should be, I will be looked at as a modern day Claudette Colvin.

 

[jthawk]

Seems the good doctor from PSU is in danger of losing his "adult" title.

 

[dandh]

No, he is correct, but my way of protesting that idiotic rule of language is to always put the punctuation outside of the quotation mark. Some day, when my way is accepted as it should be, I will be looked at as a modern day Claudette Colvin.

You should put it inside when it's an attributive phrase or part of the original quote. That is not the case here, as the quotation marks are for emphasis (air quotes). In your usage I suppose it could go either way, as he actually used the word. In the other example it was clearly for emphasis.

 

[torbee]

The doctor said 30-35% and that‘s what the media ran with even though there was an NYT article from a week ago referencing said study as finding “almost 15%” incidence. It is extremely poor reporting and is a solid example of the utter and complete failure of the media to do anything other than create hysteria with its reporting regarding Covid. They just ran with a random doctors statements without any corroboration even when a simple google search would have called what he said into question.

And where are 15% of young healthy people suffering from this heart condition as a result of covid all over the world? Why aren’t European doctors reporting this? Why isn’t the NFL observing similar incidence? Or the NBA?

It wasn’t “the media” that got it wrong - it was one outlet that did a shit job. You yourself used “the media” (the New York Times article) as evidence that “the media” got it wrong.

So sick of this dumb generalization. Some outlets are better than others, and typically those that have been around a long time and have a good reputation (I.e. the NY Times) should be believed before lesser known or clearly biased sites. There is SOME responsibility to be put on the reader to evaluate what they are reading and come to a conclusion. For example, my first post in this thread shows how skeptical I was of the report - justifiably it turns out - but it wasn’t some “media” conspiracy - it appears to be some over-eager reporter that got something wrong. Based on the statement from the PSU doctor, it appears he was speaking at a public meeting and indicating there was a “concerning” study out there and he mis-recalled the exact percentage or it was later updated at a lower rate and the author of the article ran with it without corroboration. That’s just sloppy reporting, not a “media” conspiracy.

People so often ascribe to conspiracy what 9 times out of 10 is incompetence or laziness.

 

[torbee]

I'd like to know and maybe @torbee can tell us how the Penn State doctors statements so infiltrated the media who ran with it like crazy only to find out he was repeating, inaccurately, something that someone had told him that they had read. Is that supposed to be how journalism works?

See post #100

 

[caseyballzz]

 

[dfswede]

Not always, and not in this case. I hate to defend L12, but his usage is correct.

Unless there’s a parenthetical reference, a comma is always inside quotation marks.

 

[dfswede]

You should put it inside when it's an attributive phrase or part of the original quote. That is not the case here, as the quotation marks are for emphasis (air quotes). In your usage I suppose it could go either way, as he actually used the word. In the other example it was clearly for emphasis.

Still inside.

 

[rabid goat]

It wasn’t “the media” that got it wrong - it was one outlet that did a shit job. You yourself used “the media” (the New York Times article) as evidence that “the media” got it wrong.

So sick of this dumb generalization. Some outlets are better than others, and typically those that have been around a long time and have a good reputation (I.e. the NY Times) should be believed before lesser known or clearly biased sites. There is SOME responsibility to be put on the reader to evaluate what they are reading and come to a conclusion. For example, my first post in this thread shows how skeptical I was of the report - justifiably it turns out - but it wasn’t some “media” conspiracy - it appears to be some over-eager reporter that got something wrong. Based on the statement from the PSU doctor, it appears he was speaking at a public meeting and indicating there was a “concerning” study out there and he mis-recalled the exact percentage or it was later updated at a lower rate and the author of the article ran with it without corroboration. That’s just sloppy reporting, not a “media” conspiracy.

People so often ascribe to conspiracy what 9 times out of 10 is incompetence or laziness.

I appreciate your reply.

My issue is that the media members run with what are essentially unverified reports and tweet or re-tweet about the report thus amplifying it and giving it credibility. So while "the media" may not have been running stories on their websites or printing stories in their papers about the erroneous Penn State information, the media soldiers were still a major contributor in seeding the erroneous report by re-tweeting it, commenting on it, etc. My perception is its supposed to be idiots like me who are re-tweeting unverified reports not the blue check mark media members. Am I wrong about that?

 

[rabid goat]

See post #100

I guess my point is that though The Athletic didn't technically run a story with the inaccurate information from the Penn State doctor, many of its writers re-tweeted the story and commented on it thus amplifying it and giving what was a double hearsay unverified report weight and momentum. This idea that the media has clean hands because only one outlet officially "reported" this story rings hollow to me in this climate. It's like many reporters feel like they can in essence launder a questionable report by not reporting it under their byline but by hedging with "source reports x, y, z" (none of which that reporter has been able or willing to verify). It's reporting through the backdoor that which you are unable or unwilling to do throught the front door.

 

[torbee]

I guess my point is that though The Athletic didn't technically run a story with the inaccurate information from the Penn State doctor, many of its writers re-tweeted the story and commented on it thus amplifying it and giving what was a double hearsay unverified report weight and momentum. This idea that the media has clean hands because only one outlet officially "reported" this story rings hollow to me in this climate.

This is a huge problem, agree 100 percent.

There is so much pressure to not be left in the dust when the news cycle moves so fast in the digital world.

One can argue that all these outlets are doing is “sharing” and thus don’t have the responsibility to make sure what they are sharing is 100 percent accurate, but that is a dangerous game and doesn’t really serve audiences well.

People need to view Twitter as simply an aggregator of myriad outlets, and then be very diligent in selecting ones that have a track record of credibility. It puts a lot of onus on the reader to be media literate, which likely isn’t that fair.

Kind of like when we see a rumor/speculation posted in the Lounge, but don’t fully buy in until Tom or Blair confirm.

 

[lumuhawk]

Still inside.

Same goes for periods.
Standard now for AP, APA, MLA, Chicago. I’m not sure what dandh is talking about.

https://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2011/08/punctuating-around-quotation-marks.html

 

[rabid goat]

This is a huge problem, agree 100 percent.

There is so much pressure to not be left in the dust when the news cycle moves so fast in the digital world.

One can argue that all these outlets are doing is “sharing” and thus don’t have the responsibility to make sure what they are sharing is 100 percent accurate, but that is a dangerous game and doesn’t really serve audiences well.

People need to view Twitter as simply an aggregator of myriad outlets, and then be very diligent in selecting ones that have a track record of credibility. It puts a lot of onus on the reader to be media literate, which likely isn’t that fair.

Kind of like when we see a rumor/speculation posted in the Lounge, but don’t fully buy in until Tom or Blair confirm.

The damage this practice does is immense in my opinion. The Penn State doctor unverified garbage was re-tweeted hundreds of times by prominent media members and was a leader of the non-sports news cycle for a while. Yet, the retraction of that information is not all over the news cycle.

All they are doing is "sharing" seems rather a benign way to view a situation that is not benign at all. I remember the old days that a media outlet would not report something that another media outlet was reporting until they could verify it for themselves. These reporters need to be told by their publications that they can't publish, link, or re-tweet anything on their twitter accounts that does not meet the publication's own standards for publication.

 

[whatsup13579er]

People so often ascribe to conspiracy what 9 times out of 10 is incompetence or laziness.

There’s a difference?

 

[torbee]

This is a huge problem, agree 100 percent.

There is so much pressure to not be left in the dust when the news cycle moves so fast in the digital world.

One can argue that all these outlets are doing is “sharing” and thus don’t have the responsibility to make sure what they are sharing is 100 percent accurate, but that is a dangerous game and doesn’t really serve audiences well.

The damage this practice does is immense in my opinion. The Penn State doctor unverified garbage was re-tweeted hundreds of times by prominent media members and was a leader of the non-sports news cycle for a while. Yet, the retraction of that information is not all over the news cycle.

All they are doing is "sharing" seems rather a benign way to view a situation that is not benign at all. I remember the old days that a media outlet would not report something that another media outlet was reporting until they could verify it for themselves. These reporters need to be told by their publications that they can't publish, link, or re-tweet anything on their twitter accounts that does not meet the publication's own standards for publication.

Then the ones that do that will be run out of business by the ones that don’t want to make that effort. It’s a Catch 22.

 

[torbee]

There’s a difference?

There is a massive difference.

 

[dandh]

Still inside.

Not the way I learned it.

Same goes for periods.
Standard now for AP, APA, MLA, Chicago. I’m not sure what dandh is talking about.

https://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2011/08/punctuating-around-quotation-marks.html

I'm friggin' old and all wet on this, it appears. My apologies. I was also taught to put a period inside the quotes and outside the quotes ( He said, "The world has passed me by.".) Probably should change my username to Comma Chameleon (pi).

 

[Madman_1]

Same goes for periods.
Standard now for AP, APA, MLA, Chicago. I’m not sure what dandh is talking about.

https://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2011/08/punctuating-around-quotation-marks.html

This is awesome, thanks for the link.

I actually learned something from this thread.

 

[H I McDonnough]

This is one of the "worst threads ever.". "Actually,", everyone is sort of right about punctuation and "quotation marks.".

We were taught one way back in the day, and then AP and MLA style changed it. I have to do a lot of writing and had to make that adjustment. Same is true of double or single spacing after ending a sentence.

So everyone, and no one, wins!!!!

 

[Hwk-I-St8]

Then the ones that do that will be run out of business by the ones that don’t want to make that effort. It’s a Catch 22.

The sad outcome of all of this is that I simply don't believe anything I read or hear from the news sources these days. There was a time when there was a serious effort to remain unbiased in reporting news. Further, anything published was vetted heavily for veracity. Now it's just "get it out there and we can retract if it turns out not to be true". (i don't care, the period is gonna be outside the quotes for me) or "use per capita numbers, it'll make it more sensational" type crap.

There just isn't a news source you can trust anymore. What you hear is almost certainly either flat out wrong or told from a perspective to support the reporter's bias. Click bait and sounds bites are all that matters. Get 'em to tune in with fantastically wild teasers and skew the story to make it interesting or to push an agenda.

It's a sad state of affairs and I'm really glad I'm not involved in it. What a freakin' cesspool.

 

[torbee]

The sad outcome of all of this is that I simply don't believe anything I read or hear from the news sources these days. There was a time when there was a serious effort to remain unbiased in reporting news. Further, anything published was vetted heavily for veracity. Now it's just "get it out there and we can retract if it turns out not to be true". (i don't care, the period is gonna be outside the quotes for me) or "use per capita numbers, it'll make it more sensational" type crap.

There just isn't a news source you can trust anymore. What you hear is almost certainly either flat out wrong or told from a perspective to support the reporter's bias. Click bait and sounds bites are all that matters. Get 'em to tune in with fantastically wild teasers and skew the story to make it interesting or to push an agenda.

It's a sad state of affairs and I'm really glad I'm not involved in it. What a freakin' cesspool.

This is very hyperbolic and mostly untrue.

What is true is readers need to be more discerning and thoughtful. But there is actually a lot of very solid, very good reporting being done these days, at least nationally. Local news outlets have been seriously eroded though.

 

[GHawk]

This is very hyperbolic and mostly untrue.

What is true is readers need to be more discerning and thoughtful. But there is actually a lot of very solid, very good reporting being done these days, at least nationally. Local news outlets have been seriously eroded though.

I would disagree completely. The National outlets (both liberal and conservative) are far worse than the local outlets. There is not a single national source I would trust. And I include the NY Times which I believe you or someone said was trustworthy or something like that (note the conservative papers are just as bad).

PS Sorry if I'm wrong about you and the NY Times. All these threads tend to run together.

 

[BuildemHawk]

This is very hyperbolic and mostly untrue.

What is true is readers need to be more discerning and thoughtful. But there is actually a lot of very solid, very good reporting being done these days, at least nationally. Local news outlets have been seriously eroded though.

Unfortunately Torbee that isn't very hyperbolic, or untrue. Take just the last month of B1G reporting, it has been total garbage. Unnamed sources, rumors, non facts. I mean it is a mess, and I simply won't believe one single thing put out there at this point. I am talking sports media here. Plus take that with all the horrendous reporting on Iowa's racial disparity before this compondeded this even more for me. While some of the local reporting on it was spot on, other local reporting (cough, cough, Rob Howe) wasn't reporting at all, but pushing a narrative. The national reporting on it was also terrible.

Honestly I get most all of my sports news from this site anymore. The Iowa reporting is spot on, and then people link national things that I either look it or don't. Well I use twitter for this as well, but anymore I just don't read what reporters write, as most of the time I feel it pushes a personal angle, or a hot take angle, and they aren't interested in actually reporting on a story.

 

[Hwk-I-St8]

This is very hyperbolic and mostly untrue.

What is true is readers need to be more discerning and thoughtful. But there is actually a lot of very solid, very good reporting being done these days, at least nationally. Local news outlets have been seriously eroded though.

Like everything, it's not all that way. But there's enough truth to what I said that is that it's not worth wading through the news anymore. What's more, when trying to figure out what's true or not, you just end up with more data from sources that you don't know if you can trust. It's like verifying a measurement from a home made ruler with another home made ruler. You don't know which you can trust...if either.

It would be a full-time job tracing down the veracity of everything reported these days (especially on a national level).

I gave up on news about 4 years ago. We get a newspaper, but I don't even look at it. My wife likes it for the crosswords.