Jive36
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2019
- Messages
- 228
- Likes
- 356
Unpopular opinion: I've started to come around on the idea of having events with no spectators. I don't agree with canceling the events all together but having limited spectators might be the prudent thing to do. I really think the NCAA should consider it for the big dance. Do I trust the NCAA to make a decision that would result in them losing $$$? Absolutely not.
It sure seems like the NBA is going to announce today/tomorrow they will be limiting spectators and possibly more drastic measures. The NCAA should follow suit on the spectators part. Announce it now and people that had made plans to travel to host sites can still cancel their arrangements. Wait until Tuesday/Wednesday when local governments might force the NCAA's hands it will be a big mess. You already have the Governor's of two host states (Ohio & Washington) trying to limit the size of any gathering.
If they go to no spectators, we have one year of a really strange tournament, but you potentially slow the spread of a disease. On the other hand you have spectators you potentially contribute to a spike in the outbreak rate that could be catastrophic. Experts in this type of thing have to weigh in on the chances that having spectators would lead to a spike, but all the experts I have found seem to lean towards no spectators without coming out and saying it.
I know it is an unpopular opinion but take two big steps back from your personal interests and desires, look at the bigger picture and it sure seems like having on goofy year of a tournament with no spectators is a lot better than trying to go on as normal and contributing to a epidemic.
It sure seems like the NBA is going to announce today/tomorrow they will be limiting spectators and possibly more drastic measures. The NCAA should follow suit on the spectators part. Announce it now and people that had made plans to travel to host sites can still cancel their arrangements. Wait until Tuesday/Wednesday when local governments might force the NCAA's hands it will be a big mess. You already have the Governor's of two host states (Ohio & Washington) trying to limit the size of any gathering.
If they go to no spectators, we have one year of a really strange tournament, but you potentially slow the spread of a disease. On the other hand you have spectators you potentially contribute to a spike in the outbreak rate that could be catastrophic. Experts in this type of thing have to weigh in on the chances that having spectators would lead to a spike, but all the experts I have found seem to lean towards no spectators without coming out and saying it.
I know it is an unpopular opinion but take two big steps back from your personal interests and desires, look at the bigger picture and it sure seems like having on goofy year of a tournament with no spectators is a lot better than trying to go on as normal and contributing to a epidemic.