Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

The Latest 400 or so Topics

Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)

Locked

Odds of a season happening

Yes 100%
37
42%
50-50
34
39%
probably not
14
16%
no way
3
3%
 
Total votes: 88

BodyShots
Posts: 1921
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 9:44 am

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by BodyShots » Thu Jul 16, 2020 1:08 pm

Wise Old Man wrote:
Thu Jul 16, 2020 12:10 pm
7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Thu Jul 16, 2020 6:55 am
Agreed GR. I will add that if we are going to close schools and activities we at least have to be honest with ourselves about the reasons for doing it. We are 4 months in now and there hasn’t been a single school aged kid that has died in MN. Are we closing schools for their safety and out of their best interest? Or are we asking them to make sacrifices for the elderly? My opinion is that kids are the ones bearing the brunt of the side effects of this. They’re sacrificing their education, their social lives/experiences (which is very important at those ages), and are likely the ones that actually have to deal with this monster debt that we are accumulating. Statistically speaking the bus ride to school bears a higher chance of death than Covid for most kids. So it really isn’t fair to try justify any of these decisions with statements like “we are doing this for the safety of the kids.” At least be honest about what the reasons are.

First, to OldManRiver... I’m sorry, so the Buffalo principle didn’t state it exactly the way YOU think she should’ve but, when you, Goldy, grindian, and 7Times, have to actually put YOUR fannies and livelihoods on the actual line from a decision-making standpoint, we’ll see how YOU react. You guys are freaking unbelievable. How about trying to walk a day in a person’s shoes before you criticize them. As she/he said, extracurriculars — as beneficial as we know they are — ARE A PRIVILEGE and NOT A RIGHT! Remember, they are sitting in rooms listening to the best medical experts in our state and, even nationally, in educating themselves in regards to making the best decisions possible.

And yes 7Times, no one under 19 has died. Thank freaking God. Maybe, just MAYBE that’s due to the way our state’s leadership has reacted to the situation. Did you ever think of that?!? And yes, one of the most significant reasons we are considering closing schools/not having activities IS to help protect the elderly/immune compromised. No one in a position of authority who has said we need to seriously consider this, has said anything differently. And, there are a significant number of younger and healthy people — in my definition that’s 18-60 — that have been infected, had significant symptoms, and in all likelihood will have lifelong disabilities/issues with various organs/systems of body function. THIS ISNT JUST ABOUT THE DEATHS...It’s amazing how when one of us brings that specific point up, none of you geniuses ever responds to it.

Next to Goldy... I can promise you that — and you can ask Elliot this as well — as someone deeply involved at the youth level, if the MSHSL doesn’t play, it’s literally a 99% chance Minnesota Hockey doesn’t either. That’s just a fact. Again, It’s really interesting that those of you that think playing or participating in any type of recreational/amateur sport or other activity is worth the lives of who knows how many people — yes, the vast majority being elderly but, a now increasing number of younger people — especially when literally everyone of those potentially thousands of deaths (yes, potentially thousands) is absolutely and completely preventable. Again I ask any of you in this camp, PLEASE provide me the ACTUAL FREAKING NUMBER of preventable/“acceptable” deaths that you believe justifies playing sports or doing activities that will very likely increase spread AND lead to more preventable deaths? C’mon, if you REALLY believe in your position, then provide the damn number. Because THAT IS the ONLY data point that matters in this discussion/debate. All of the other things that kids will miss out on — as unfortunate as they are — do NOT justify whatever activity it is if that participation leads to preventable deaths. We’re not talking about shutting things down “forever” as a large number of “got to open it up” people claim. Literally every expert in infectious disease and vaccines is saying we will like have a number of — not just one but, a number of — effective vaccines that are widely distributed by early 2021. 6-8 months doesn’t meet my or most people’s definitions of “forever”.

In a previous post, I provided an example of what happened at a two day hockey camp in Ashland. 13 confirmed infections (a mix of players and parents) plus — and this was a week ago — 11 more symptomatic waiting on results. Which, also caused to different baseball leagues in two different states to suspend play for at least a week. Just one attempt at an indoor team sports event. One attempt. Now, from a risk assessment standpoint is having this type of even with zero restrictions — no mask requirements, no limits on people in the rink (it is Wisconsin so...) the same as doing something similar, but with masks required to be worn by players and coaches in and out of the rink and, no parents allowed inside? No, completely different. But, that’s probably the maximum amount of activity we can safely do without significantly increasing the risk of spread.

And really 7Times, please tell me you’re not this freaking dense. NO, we aren’t closing schools to only protect kids. 1/3 of our teachers are over 50/have underlying health issues that make them far more susceptible to severe symptoms. Now, if you try and tell me that they should just stay home, then you can also tell me where you’re getting all of the necessary replacements. Especially when the vast majority of current subs are in their 60s. Further along the whole ridiculousness of the “are we shutting down schools to protect kids” question — no, we’re also shutting down schools to try and limit the number of elderly who live with their grandkids — you know, those who you guys even admit are at significant risk from getting sick and dying.

As for your “monster debt” comment. A couple things... One, it sure would be nice to have that $23 trilllion In tax cuts we have the top 1% and corporations that they didn’t need. You know, the tax cut that would “pay for itself”. The one that literally almost no one in the actual middle class received anything significant from? And, that had no measurable impact on improving the economy from the last two years of the Obama administration? THAT tax cut. Number two, and I’ve laid this out previously, interest rates for the government are literally almost at zero. Meaning, we aren’t paying hardly any interest on the current pandemic spending which makes cut far easier to pay those monies back. And again, we could very easily do what other western democracies have done and just paid everyone at least $3K a month until a vaccine, halted all loan payments on cars, houses, and college debt until we had a vaccine. We could’ve easily done that thru next June with no problem.
=D> =D> =D>

Tell it like it is WOM!!

And find me one substitute teacher that would want to go into a school for 1 day to sit in 6 classes with 30 students each, where anyone of them might be carrying the virus. Good luck with that one!

Wake up people and get your head out of the sand. It's a pandemic and sacrifices will need to be made to get through it. Sacrifices by all.

ClassAGuy
Posts: 2564
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2019 6:51 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by ClassAGuy » Thu Jul 16, 2020 1:46 pm

Breaking News-

MIAC cancels all Non-Conference contests for Fall Sports....

As much as some on hear want to wish away Covid-19 its becoming a growing threat to High School Hockey this winter by the day. I am starting to get worried again because we have yet to come up with a Unified plan... I feel so bad for kids... MSHSL Fall Sports looking less likely by the day.

With the big MDE July 27th announcement looming the MN D3 League Announcement is another cringe-worthy news note for our hope for our Game of hockey this winter.

7TIMECHAMPS
Posts: 279
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 8:58 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by 7TIMECHAMPS » Thu Jul 16, 2020 1:48 pm

Wise Old Man wrote:
Thu Jul 16, 2020 12:10 pm
7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Thu Jul 16, 2020 6:55 am
Agreed GR. I will add that if we are going to close schools and activities we at least have to be honest with ourselves about the reasons for doing it. We are 4 months in now and there hasn’t been a single school aged kid that has died in MN. Are we closing schools for their safety and out of their best interest? Or are we asking them to make sacrifices for the elderly? My opinion is that kids are the ones bearing the brunt of the side effects of this. They’re sacrificing their education, their social lives/experiences (which is very important at those ages), and are likely the ones that actually have to deal with this monster debt that we are accumulating. Statistically speaking the bus ride to school bears a higher chance of death than Covid for most kids. So it really isn’t fair to try justify any of these decisions with statements like “we are doing this for the safety of the kids.” At least be honest about what the reasons are.

First, to OldManRiver... I’m sorry, so the Buffalo principle didn’t state it exactly the way YOU think she should’ve but, when you, Goldy, grindian, and 7Times, have to actually put YOUR fannies and livelihoods on the actual line from a decision-making standpoint, we’ll see how YOU react. You guys are freaking unbelievable. How about trying to walk a day in a person’s shoes before you criticize them. As she/he said, extracurriculars — as beneficial as we know they are — ARE A PRIVILEGE and NOT A RIGHT! Remember, they are sitting in rooms listening to the best medical experts in our state and, even nationally, in educating themselves in regards to making the best decisions possible.

And yes 7Times, no one under 19 has died. Thank freaking God. Maybe, just MAYBE that’s due to the way our state’s leadership has reacted to the situation. Did you ever think of that?!? And yes, one of the most significant reasons we are considering closing schools/not having activities IS to help protect the elderly/immune compromised. No one in a position of authority who has said we need to seriously consider this, has said anything differently. And, there are a significant number of younger and healthy people — in my definition that’s 18-60 — that have been infected, had significant symptoms, and in all likelihood will have lifelong disabilities/issues with various organs/systems of body function. THIS ISNT JUST ABOUT THE DEATHS...It’s amazing how when one of us brings that specific point up, none of you geniuses ever responds to it.

Next to Goldy... I can promise you that — and you can ask Elliot this as well — as someone deeply involved at the youth level, if the MSHSL doesn’t play, it’s literally a 99% chance Minnesota Hockey doesn’t either. That’s just a fact. Again, It’s really interesting that those of you that think playing or participating in any type of recreational/amateur sport or other activity is worth the lives of who knows how many people — yes, the vast majority being elderly but, a now increasing number of younger people — especially when literally everyone of those potentially thousands of deaths (yes, potentially thousands) is absolutely and completely preventable. Again I ask any of you in this camp, PLEASE provide me the ACTUAL FREAKING NUMBER of preventable/“acceptable” deaths that you believe justifies playing sports or doing activities that will very likely increase spread AND lead to more preventable deaths? C’mon, if you REALLY believe in your position, then provide the damn number. Because THAT IS the ONLY data point that matters in this discussion/debate. All of the other things that kids will miss out on — as unfortunate as they are — do NOT justify whatever activity it is if that participation leads to preventable deaths. We’re not talking about shutting things down “forever” as a large number of “got to open it up” people claim. Literally every expert in infectious disease and vaccines is saying we will like have a number of — not just one but, a number of — effective vaccines that are widely distributed by early 2021. 6-8 months doesn’t meet my or most people’s definitions of “forever”.

In a previous post, I provided an example of what happened at a two day hockey camp in Ashland. 13 confirmed infections (a mix of players and parents) plus — and this was a week ago — 11 more symptomatic waiting on results. Which, also caused to different baseball leagues in two different states to suspend play for at least a week. Just one attempt at an indoor team sports event. One attempt. Now, from a risk assessment standpoint is having this type of even with zero restrictions — no mask requirements, no limits on people in the rink (it is Wisconsin so...) the same as doing something similar, but with masks required to be worn by players and coaches in and out of the rink and, no parents allowed inside? No, completely different. But, that’s probably the maximum amount of activity we can safely do without significantly increasing the risk of spread.

And really 7Times, please tell me you’re not this freaking dense. NO, we aren’t closing schools to only protect kids. 1/3 of our teachers are over 50/have underlying health issues that make them far more susceptible to severe symptoms. Now, if you try and tell me that they should just stay home, then you can also tell me where you’re getting all of the necessary replacements. Especially when the vast majority of current subs are in their 60s. Further along the whole ridiculousness of the “are we shutting down schools to protect kids” question — no, we’re also shutting down schools to try and limit the number of elderly who live with their grandkids — you know, those who you guys even admit are at significant risk from getting sick and dying.

As for your “monster debt” comment. A couple things... One, it sure would be nice to have that $23 trilllion In tax cuts we have the top 1% and corporations that they didn’t need. You know, the tax cut that would “pay for itself”. The one that literally almost no one in the actual middle class received anything significant from? And, that had no measurable impact on improving the economy from the last two years of the Obama administration? THAT tax cut. Number two, and I’ve laid this out previously, interest rates for the government are literally almost at zero. Meaning, we aren’t paying hardly any interest on the current pandemic spending which makes cut far easier to pay those monies back. And again, we could very easily do what other western democracies have done and just paid everyone at least $3K a month until a vaccine, halted all loan payments on cars, houses, and college debt until we had a vaccine. We could’ve easily done that thru next June with no problem.
Yeah WOM we all know that you think the world is ending and that everyone should just sit in their houses for a year (or who knows how long) and collect unemployment. You don't have to write a book every day on here telling us the same old thing. A few others points.

You have no idea what any of us do or what kinds of decisions we make so so don't comment on that.

Since your acceptable amount of deaths is zero who will be notifying you that every person on earth has been vaccinated and you are ok to leave your house again? And what is the timetable for that?

I guess education just isn't "essential" then. Almost all of the evidence points to distance learning being a disaster. I am just glad our other essential workers don't have the same feelings.

No wonder your posts get so long. You bring up all of this random stuff that nobody was talking about. Did anybody mention tax cuts?

In other news North Dakota gave fall sports the green light for full seasons in the fall (at the discretion of each school). Any bets on how many kids from Moorhead, EGF, etc. end up with homes/apartments in ND if their season is a go and MN's isn't? I guess nobody from ND was aware of WOM's theory that anybody in a leadership position is going to put the brakes on all seasons until there is zero risk. Or maybe they're all just morons like myself and the others mentioned above.

ClassAGuy
Posts: 2564
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2019 6:51 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by ClassAGuy » Thu Jul 16, 2020 2:15 pm

7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Thu Jul 16, 2020 1:48 pm
Wise Old Man wrote:
Thu Jul 16, 2020 12:10 pm
7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Thu Jul 16, 2020 6:55 am
Agreed GR. I will add that if we are going to close schools and activities we at least have to be honest with ourselves about the reasons for doing it. We are 4 months in now and there hasn’t been a single school aged kid that has died in MN. Are we closing schools for their safety and out of their best interest? Or are we asking them to make sacrifices for the elderly? My opinion is that kids are the ones bearing the brunt of the side effects of this. They’re sacrificing their education, their social lives/experiences (which is very important at those ages), and are likely the ones that actually have to deal with this monster debt that we are accumulating. Statistically speaking the bus ride to school bears a higher chance of death than Covid for most kids. So it really isn’t fair to try justify any of these decisions with statements like “we are doing this for the safety of the kids.” At least be honest about what the reasons are.

First, to OldManRiver... I’m sorry, so the Buffalo principle didn’t state it exactly the way YOU think she should’ve but, when you, Goldy, grindian, and 7Times, have to actually put YOUR fannies and livelihoods on the actual line from a decision-making standpoint, we’ll see how YOU react. You guys are freaking unbelievable. How about trying to walk a day in a person’s shoes before you criticize them. As she/he said, extracurriculars — as beneficial as we know they are — ARE A PRIVILEGE and NOT A RIGHT! Remember, they are sitting in rooms listening to the best medical experts in our state and, even nationally, in educating themselves in regards to making the best decisions possible.

And yes 7Times, no one under 19 has died. Thank freaking God. Maybe, just MAYBE that’s due to the way our state’s leadership has reacted to the situation. Did you ever think of that?!? And yes, one of the most significant reasons we are considering closing schools/not having activities IS to help protect the elderly/immune compromised. No one in a position of authority who has said we need to seriously consider this, has said anything differently. And, there are a significant number of younger and healthy people — in my definition that’s 18-60 — that have been infected, had significant symptoms, and in all likelihood will have lifelong disabilities/issues with various organs/systems of body function. THIS ISNT JUST ABOUT THE DEATHS...It’s amazing how when one of us brings that specific point up, none of you geniuses ever responds to it.

Next to Goldy... I can promise you that — and you can ask Elliot this as well — as someone deeply involved at the youth level, if the MSHSL doesn’t play, it’s literally a 99% chance Minnesota Hockey doesn’t either. That’s just a fact. Again, It’s really interesting that those of you that think playing or participating in any type of recreational/amateur sport or other activity is worth the lives of who knows how many people — yes, the vast majority being elderly but, a now increasing number of younger people — especially when literally everyone of those potentially thousands of deaths (yes, potentially thousands) is absolutely and completely preventable. Again I ask any of you in this camp, PLEASE provide me the ACTUAL FREAKING NUMBER of preventable/“acceptable” deaths that you believe justifies playing sports or doing activities that will very likely increase spread AND lead to more preventable deaths? C’mon, if you REALLY believe in your position, then provide the damn number. Because THAT IS the ONLY data point that matters in this discussion/debate. All of the other things that kids will miss out on — as unfortunate as they are — do NOT justify whatever activity it is if that participation leads to preventable deaths. We’re not talking about shutting things down “forever” as a large number of “got to open it up” people claim. Literally every expert in infectious disease and vaccines is saying we will like have a number of — not just one but, a number of — effective vaccines that are widely distributed by early 2021. 6-8 months doesn’t meet my or most people’s definitions of “forever”.

In a previous post, I provided an example of what happened at a two day hockey camp in Ashland. 13 confirmed infections (a mix of players and parents) plus — and this was a week ago — 11 more symptomatic waiting on results. Which, also caused to different baseball leagues in two different states to suspend play for at least a week. Just one attempt at an indoor team sports event. One attempt. Now, from a risk assessment standpoint is having this type of even with zero restrictions — no mask requirements, no limits on people in the rink (it is Wisconsin so...) the same as doing something similar, but with masks required to be worn by players and coaches in and out of the rink and, no parents allowed inside? No, completely different. But, that’s probably the maximum amount of activity we can safely do without significantly increasing the risk of spread.

And really 7Times, please tell me you’re not this freaking dense. NO, we aren’t closing schools to only protect kids. 1/3 of our teachers are over 50/have underlying health issues that make them far more susceptible to severe symptoms. Now, if you try and tell me that they should just stay home, then you can also tell me where you’re getting all of the necessary replacements. Especially when the vast majority of current subs are in their 60s. Further along the whole ridiculousness of the “are we shutting down schools to protect kids” question — no, we’re also shutting down schools to try and limit the number of elderly who live with their grandkids — you know, those who you guys even admit are at significant risk from getting sick and dying.

As for your “monster debt” comment. A couple things... One, it sure would be nice to have that $23 trilllion In tax cuts we have the top 1% and corporations that they didn’t need. You know, the tax cut that would “pay for itself”. The one that literally almost no one in the actual middle class received anything significant from? And, that had no measurable impact on improving the economy from the last two years of the Obama administration? THAT tax cut. Number two, and I’ve laid this out previously, interest rates for the government are literally almost at zero. Meaning, we aren’t paying hardly any interest on the current pandemic spending which makes cut far easier to pay those monies back. And again, we could very easily do what other western democracies have done and just paid everyone at least $3K a month until a vaccine, halted all loan payments on cars, houses, and college debt until we had a vaccine. We could’ve easily done that thru next June with no problem.
Yeah WOM we all know that you think the world is ending and that everyone should just sit in their houses for a year (or who knows how long) and collect unemployment. You don't have to write a book every day on here telling us the same old thing. A few others points.

You have no idea what any of us do or what kinds of decisions we make so so don't comment on that.

Since your acceptable amount of deaths is zero who will be notifying you that every person on earth has been vaccinated and you are ok to leave your house again? And what is the timetable for that?

I guess education just isn't "essential" then. Almost all of the evidence points to distance learning being a disaster. I am just glad our other essential workers don't have the same feelings.

No wonder your posts get so long. You bring up all of this random stuff that nobody was talking about. Did anybody mention tax cuts?

But fine I will play along. Why don't you start by citing your source on the $23 trillion? Most estimates are $1-2 trillion over a course of 10 years (that is from the Tax Policy Center.org). Several others cited similar numbers. So that is an average of $80-160 billion a year. And you are comparing that to $3 trillion ($6 trillion if the House's newest bill gets passed) that will last us months? I would think somebody that is such a "genius" and regularly boasts how respected they are in their community would come up with something a little better than that. We are at WW2 levels of spending....and that is before any additional bills that may pass. You just can't argue that the TCJA is in the same arena as this. Absurd.

In other news North Dakota gave fall sports the green light for full seasons in the fall (at the discretion of each school). Any bets on how many kids from Moorhead, EGF, etc. end up with homes/apartments in ND if their season is a go and MN's isn't? I guess nobody from ND was aware of WOM's theory that anybody in a leadership position is going to put the brakes on all seasons until there is zero risk. Or maybe they're all just morons like myself and the others mentioned above.
This is great news! North Dakota is green light... Pennsylvania is a green light.... Utah is a green light.... Ohio is a green light

Nebraska will be a green light just played there all-star football game last weekend.

Iowa will be a green light playing summer ball now...

Maybe there is hope for the kids after all!!

Finally positive news!! Walz and the MDE will open on the Hybrid model with each school having the ability to work within that on the 27th most likely that should be good enough maybe to get sports rolling! Now getting to the winter with out shutting down might be the next great debate

ClassAGuy
Posts: 2564
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2019 6:51 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by ClassAGuy » Thu Jul 16, 2020 3:45 pm

NCAA makes it clear: football running out of time to save season

In perhaps the most sobering picture yet of where things stand for fall college sports, the NCAA on Thursday released a series of guidelines for a potential return-to-competition amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

Amid all the protocols and possibilities, such as daily health checks and testing within 72 hours of competition in some sports, were some words that should strike fear in — or, hopefully, spur to action — those who care about the safety of our country and the reward of college football.

“Any recommendation on a pathway toward a safe return to sport will depend on the national trajectory of COVID-19 spread,” Brian Hainline, NCAA chief medical officer, said in a news release on the NCAA web site. “The idea of sport resocialization is predicated on a scenario of reduced or flattened infection rates.”

Those trendlines have been going in the wrong direction lately — something acknowledged again, bluntly, by the NCAA in a graph accompanying a tweet on the subject.

There are two key lines: The one showing a steep upward trend of confirmed cases per 1 million U.S. residents on average over the last seven days (about 700, per the graph) and the gradual downward slope of confirmed cases that the NCAA labeled “where we thought we’d be,” which would be about half of where we are now and going down instead of up.

For an extra splash of cold water, here is what NCAA President Mark Emmert had to say in the release:

“When we made the extremely difficult decision to cancel last spring’s championships it was because there was simply no way to conduct them safely,” Emmert said. “This document lays out the advice of health care professionals as to how to resume college sports if we can achieve an environment where COVID-19 rates are manageable. Today, sadly, the data point in the wrong direction. If there is to be college sports in the fall, we need to get a much better handle on the pandemic.”

It should come as no surprise to anyone who has been following the virus in recent weeks. Hot spots are developing all over the country — and particularly in regions where college football is king, as noted by Star Tribune sports editor Chris Carr when pointing toward a New York Times graphic.

Even with conferences punting on nonconference games to buy some time, college football basically has two months until the start of its regular season. Given that planning and decisions on whether or not to play will need to be made somewhat in advance of a mid-September start date, there is precious little time — maybe a handful of weeks — for the trend to change and college sports to even have a chance of being played in the fall.

Getting a better handle on the virus should be a priority for a million public health reasons above and beyond college football, but if this threat is what it takes to achieve better distancing and near-universal masking (at least, um, outside of Georgia), then so be it. A win is a win.

And it should be a simple path to victory. Other countries have done it, as that NCAA graph also shows. CDC Director Robert Redfield said it just this week: “If we could get everybody to wear a mask right now, I really think in the next four, six, eight weeks, we could bring this epidemic under control.”

Otherwise, be prepared for a fall full of consequences — one of which very much looks like it would be a lost season of college sports.

karl(east)
Posts: 6462
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 9:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by karl(east) » Thu Jul 16, 2020 6:52 pm

Nuking anything that wanders off into such realms as tax policy or any political commentary beyond anything that is directly relevant to whether or not we have a hockey season in 2020-2021.

Wise Old Man
Posts: 340
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2019 8:11 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by Wise Old Man » Thu Jul 16, 2020 9:02 pm

7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Thu Jul 16, 2020 1:48 pm
Wise Old Man wrote:
Thu Jul 16, 2020 12:10 pm
7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Thu Jul 16, 2020 6:55 am
Agreed GR. I will add that if we are going to close schools and activities we at least have to be honest with ourselves about the reasons for doing it. We are 4 months in now and there hasn’t been a single school aged kid that has died in MN. Are we closing schools for their safety and out of their best interest? Or are we asking them to make sacrifices for the elderly? My opinion is that kids are the ones bearing the brunt of the side effects of this. They’re sacrificing their education, their social lives/experiences (which is very important at those ages), and are likely the ones that actually have to deal with this monster debt that we are accumulating. Statistically speaking the bus ride to school bears a higher chance of death than Covid for most kids. So it really isn’t fair to try justify any of these decisions with statements like “we are doing this for the safety of the kids.” At least be honest about what the reasons are.

First, to OldManRiver... I’m sorry, so the Buffalo principle didn’t state it exactly the way YOU think she should’ve but, when you, Goldy, grindian, and 7Times, have to actually put YOUR fannies and livelihoods on the actual line from a decision-making standpoint, we’ll see how YOU react. You guys are freaking unbelievable. How about trying to walk a day in a person’s shoes before you criticize them. As she/he said, extracurriculars — as beneficial as we know they are — ARE A PRIVILEGE and NOT A RIGHT! Remember, they are sitting in rooms listening to the best medical experts in our state and, even nationally, in educating themselves in regards to making the best decisions possible.

And yes 7Times, no one under 19 has died. Thank freaking God. Maybe, just MAYBE that’s due to the way our state’s leadership has reacted to the situation. Did you ever think of that?!? And yes, one of the most significant reasons we are considering closing schools/not having activities IS to help protect the elderly/immune compromised. No one in a position of authority who has said we need to seriously consider this, has said anything differently. And, there are a significant number of younger and healthy people — in my definition that’s 18-60 — that have been infected, had significant symptoms, and in all likelihood will have lifelong disabilities/issues with various organs/systems of body function. THIS ISNT JUST ABOUT THE DEATHS...It’s amazing how when one of us brings that specific point up, none of you geniuses ever responds to it.

Next to Goldy... I can promise you that — and you can ask Elliot this as well — as someone deeply involved at the youth level, if the MSHSL doesn’t play, it’s literally a 99% chance Minnesota Hockey doesn’t either. That’s just a fact. Again, It’s really interesting that those of you that think playing or participating in any type of recreational/amateur sport or other activity is worth the lives of who knows how many people — yes, the vast majority being elderly but, a now increasing number of younger people — especially when literally everyone of those potentially thousands of deaths (yes, potentially thousands) is absolutely and completely preventable. Again I ask any of you in this camp, PLEASE provide me the ACTUAL FREAKING NUMBER of preventable/“acceptable” deaths that you believe justifies playing sports or doing activities that will very likely increase spread AND lead to more preventable deaths? C’mon, if you REALLY believe in your position, then provide the damn number. Because THAT IS the ONLY data point that matters in this discussion/debate. All of the other things that kids will miss out on — as unfortunate as they are — do NOT justify whatever activity it is if that participation leads to preventable deaths. We’re not talking about shutting things down “forever” as a large number of “got to open it up” people claim. Literally every expert in infectious disease and vaccines is saying we will like have a number of — not just one but, a number of — effective vaccines that are widely distributed by early 2021. 6-8 months doesn’t meet my or most people’s definitions of “forever”.

In a previous post, I provided an example of what happened at a two day hockey camp in Ashland. 13 confirmed infections (a mix of players and parents) plus — and this was a week ago — 11 more symptomatic waiting on results. Which, also caused to different baseball leagues in two different states to suspend play for at least a week. Just one attempt at an indoor team sports event. One attempt. Now, from a risk assessment standpoint is having this type of even with zero restrictions — no mask requirements, no limits on people in the rink (it is Wisconsin so...) the same as doing something similar, but with masks required to be worn by players and coaches in and out of the rink and, no parents allowed inside? No, completely different. But, that’s probably the maximum amount of activity we can safely do without significantly increasing the risk of spread.

And really 7Times, please tell me you’re not this freaking dense. NO, we aren’t closing schools to only protect kids. 1/3 of our teachers are over 50/have underlying health issues that make them far more susceptible to severe symptoms. Now, if you try and tell me that they should just stay home, then you can also tell me where you’re getting all of the necessary replacements. Especially when the vast majority of current subs are in their 60s. Further along the whole ridiculousness of the “are we shutting down schools to protect kids” question — no, we’re also shutting down schools to try and limit the number of elderly who live with their grandkids — you know, those who you guys even admit are at significant risk from getting sick and dying.

As for your “monster debt” comment. A couple things... One, it sure would be nice to have that $23 trilllion In tax cuts we have the top 1% and corporations that they didn’t need. You know, the tax cut that would “pay for itself”. The one that literally almost no one in the actual middle class received anything significant from? And, that had no measurable impact on improving the economy from the last two years of the Obama administration? THAT tax cut. Number two, and I’ve laid this out previously, interest rates for the government are literally almost at zero. Meaning, we aren’t paying hardly any interest on the current pandemic spending which makes cut far easier to pay those monies back. And again, we could very easily do what other western democracies have done and just paid everyone at least $3K a month until a vaccine, halted all loan payments on cars, houses, and college debt until we had a vaccine. We could’ve easily done that thru next June with no problem.
Yeah WOM we all know that you think the world is ending and that everyone should just sit in their houses for a year (or who knows how long) and collect unemployment. You don't have to write a book every day on here telling us the same old thing. A few others points.

You have no idea what any of us do or what kinds of decisions we make so so don't comment on that.

Since your acceptable amount of deaths is zero who will be notifying you that every person on earth has been vaccinated and you are ok to leave your house again? And what is the timetable for that?

I guess education just isn't "essential" then. Almost all of the evidence points to distance learning being a disaster. I am just glad our other essential workers don't have the same feelings.

No wonder your posts get so long. You bring up all of this random stuff that nobody was talking about. Did anybody mention tax cuts?

In other news North Dakota gave fall sports the green light for full seasons in the fall (at the discretion of each school). Any bets on how many kids from Moorhead, EGF, etc. end up with homes/apartments in ND if their season is a go and MN's isn't? I guess nobody from ND was aware of WOM's theory that anybody in a leadership position is going to put the brakes on all seasons until there is zero risk. Or maybe they're all just morons like myself and the others mentioned above.

First to Karl... I apologize for going down the "tax cut" road. However, if one of the main arguments as to whether or not we could've locked things down until we had a vaccine is that we couldn't afford to pay out that much money, doesn't that automatically open up "that side" of the debate to the incredibly large and unnecessary amounts of reductions in the government coffers that recently occurred which would have made those payments/lock downs far easier to execute? I completely understand why the Mods want to avoid overt political discussions -- especially since Nov. 2016. :mrgreen: Still, we all know what the common denominator is for why states like North Dakota, Iowa, South Dakota, Nebraska, Ohio, and Pennsylvania are saying they're going to have "normal" high school fall sports. Their governors have a specific affiliation. And, it's extremely sad that our country has now turned a once in a hundred year pandemic into a political debate which, has now turned something as simple and obvious as wearing a mask inside a building into a political debate and, is now turning both high school and college sports, as well as something as basic as whether we put kids back in school full-time into one as well. But, unfortunately, it's the country we live in. Regardless, from here on I will do my best to post in as apolitical a style as possible. 8)

Next, 7Times... First, I don't think the world is ending. Nor have I insinuated as much. Next, my posts are as long as they are because one, in relation to this topic, you and the others on that side of the debate post so much stuff that is inaccurate that it takes that much verbiage to refute it all. And, if I'm saying the "same old thing" in many of my posts, it's because you guys repeats the same tired old arguments for why you feel the way you do. So, I feel the need to continually respond to those same old points because, if you think that by repeating it enough times I'll simply choose not to respond, well... I obviously enjoy a good debate, along with having plenty of time to engage at the moment. Second, when I make points or, ask you to respond to a question in a specific manner, funny, you guys choose not to ever respond/answer the question with the specificity required. You know, like the fact I've literally asked you, grindian, and Goldy what the actual number of unnecessary/preventable deaths is to justify not having youth/amateur sports/open up the economy is.. :P Third, you may not understand this but, the most successful people in life understand that the details matter. It's how you win a debate. You should try it sometime.

However, I do believe in science, and I'm confident I have the appropriate perspective in regards to whether the needs of the many (the thousands of still likely preventable deaths) outweigh the needs of the few (playing youth/amateur sports) or the one. As for your comment that, "You have no idea what any of us do or what kinds of decisions we make so so don't comment on that", I'm sorry but, I re-read my entire previous post three times and I honestly don't see where anything I stated could be misconstrued for what you seem to think it does. Again, this is where the details matter as you don't provide any context for what you're trying to say.

As I've already stated at least three times, no one is saying education isn't essential. What some of us are saying is that the importance of education has to be considered within the nuance of the pandemic and, how putting kids back in class either part or full-time increases the risk of transmission to people other than students. And yes, a distance learning program done on the fly within a two week period by people who've never taught within that realm, was far from ideal. However, don't you think that given the fact there was a strong possibility that they'd have to do on-line learning again, coupled with having three full months to improve it, that it will probably be much improved? You call me a fatalist... :roll:

And, to make this post even longer, I noticed none of you guys weighed in on the Ashland hockey camp outbreak...

7TIMECHAMPS
Posts: 279
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 8:58 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by 7TIMECHAMPS » Thu Jul 16, 2020 10:25 pm

Wise Old Man wrote:
Thu Jul 16, 2020 9:02 pm
7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Thu Jul 16, 2020 1:48 pm
Wise Old Man wrote:
Thu Jul 16, 2020 12:10 pm



First, to OldManRiver... I’m sorry, so the Buffalo principle didn’t state it exactly the way YOU think she should’ve but, when you, Goldy, grindian, and 7Times, have to actually put YOUR fannies and livelihoods on the actual line from a decision-making standpoint, we’ll see how YOU react. You guys are freaking unbelievable. How about trying to walk a day in a person’s shoes before you criticize them. As she/he said, extracurriculars — as beneficial as we know they are — ARE A PRIVILEGE and NOT A RIGHT! Remember, they are sitting in rooms listening to the best medical experts in our state and, even nationally, in educating themselves in regards to making the best decisions possible.

And yes 7Times, no one under 19 has died. Thank freaking God. Maybe, just MAYBE that’s due to the way our state’s leadership has reacted to the situation. Did you ever think of that?!? And yes, one of the most significant reasons we are considering closing schools/not having activities IS to help protect the elderly/immune compromised. No one in a position of authority who has said we need to seriously consider this, has said anything differently. And, there are a significant number of younger and healthy people — in my definition that’s 18-60 — that have been infected, had significant symptoms, and in all likelihood will have lifelong disabilities/issues with various organs/systems of body function. THIS ISNT JUST ABOUT THE DEATHS...It’s amazing how when one of us brings that specific point up, none of you geniuses ever responds to it.

Next to Goldy... I can promise you that — and you can ask Elliot this as well — as someone deeply involved at the youth level, if the MSHSL doesn’t play, it’s literally a 99% chance Minnesota Hockey doesn’t either. That’s just a fact. Again, It’s really interesting that those of you that think playing or participating in any type of recreational/amateur sport or other activity is worth the lives of who knows how many people — yes, the vast majority being elderly but, a now increasing number of younger people — especially when literally everyone of those potentially thousands of deaths (yes, potentially thousands) is absolutely and completely preventable. Again I ask any of you in this camp, PLEASE provide me the ACTUAL FREAKING NUMBER of preventable/“acceptable” deaths that you believe justifies playing sports or doing activities that will very likely increase spread AND lead to more preventable deaths? C’mon, if you REALLY believe in your position, then provide the damn number. Because THAT IS the ONLY data point that matters in this discussion/debate. All of the other things that kids will miss out on — as unfortunate as they are — do NOT justify whatever activity it is if that participation leads to preventable deaths. We’re not talking about shutting things down “forever” as a large number of “got to open it up” people claim. Literally every expert in infectious disease and vaccines is saying we will like have a number of — not just one but, a number of — effective vaccines that are widely distributed by early 2021. 6-8 months doesn’t meet my or most people’s definitions of “forever”.

In a previous post, I provided an example of what happened at a two day hockey camp in Ashland. 13 confirmed infections (a mix of players and parents) plus — and this was a week ago — 11 more symptomatic waiting on results. Which, also caused to different baseball leagues in two different states to suspend play for at least a week. Just one attempt at an indoor team sports event. One attempt. Now, from a risk assessment standpoint is having this type of even with zero restrictions — no mask requirements, no limits on people in the rink (it is Wisconsin so...) the same as doing something similar, but with masks required to be worn by players and coaches in and out of the rink and, no parents allowed inside? No, completely different. But, that’s probably the maximum amount of activity we can safely do without significantly increasing the risk of spread.

And really 7Times, please tell me you’re not this freaking dense. NO, we aren’t closing schools to only protect kids. 1/3 of our teachers are over 50/have underlying health issues that make them far more susceptible to severe symptoms. Now, if you try and tell me that they should just stay home, then you can also tell me where you’re getting all of the necessary replacements. Especially when the vast majority of current subs are in their 60s. Further along the whole ridiculousness of the “are we shutting down schools to protect kids” question — no, we’re also shutting down schools to try and limit the number of elderly who live with their grandkids — you know, those who you guys even admit are at significant risk from getting sick and dying.

As for your “monster debt” comment. A couple things... One, it sure would be nice to have that $23 trilllion In tax cuts we have the top 1% and corporations that they didn’t need. You know, the tax cut that would “pay for itself”. The one that literally almost no one in the actual middle class received anything significant from? And, that had no measurable impact on improving the economy from the last two years of the Obama administration? THAT tax cut. Number two, and I’ve laid this out previously, interest rates for the government are literally almost at zero. Meaning, we aren’t paying hardly any interest on the current pandemic spending which makes cut far easier to pay those monies back. And again, we could very easily do what other western democracies have done and just paid everyone at least $3K a month until a vaccine, halted all loan payments on cars, houses, and college debt until we had a vaccine. We could’ve easily done that thru next June with no problem.
Yeah WOM we all know that you think the world is ending and that everyone should just sit in their houses for a year (or who knows how long) and collect unemployment. You don't have to write a book every day on here telling us the same old thing. A few others points.

You have no idea what any of us do or what kinds of decisions we make so so don't comment on that.

Since your acceptable amount of deaths is zero who will be notifying you that every person on earth has been vaccinated and you are ok to leave your house again? And what is the timetable for that?

I guess education just isn't "essential" then. Almost all of the evidence points to distance learning being a disaster. I am just glad our other essential workers don't have the same feelings.

No wonder your posts get so long. You bring up all of this random stuff that nobody was talking about. Did anybody mention tax cuts?

In other news North Dakota gave fall sports the green light for full seasons in the fall (at the discretion of each school). Any bets on how many kids from Moorhead, EGF, etc. end up with homes/apartments in ND if their season is a go and MN's isn't? I guess nobody from ND was aware of WOM's theory that anybody in a leadership position is going to put the brakes on all seasons until there is zero risk. Or maybe they're all just morons like myself and the others mentioned above.

First to Karl... I apologize for going down the "tax cut" road. However, if one of the main arguments as to whether or not we could've locked things down until we had a vaccine is that we couldn't afford to pay out that much money, doesn't that automatically open up "that side" of the debate to the incredibly large and unnecessary amounts of reductions in the government coffers that recently occurred which would have made those payments/lock downs far easier to execute? I completely understand why the Mods want to avoid overt political discussions -- especially since Nov. 2016. :mrgreen: Still, we all know what the common denominator is for why states like North Dakota, Iowa, South Dakota, Nebraska, Ohio, and Pennsylvania are saying they're going to have "normal" high school fall sports. Their governors have a specific affiliation. And, it's extremely sad that our country has now turned a once in a hundred year pandemic into a political debate which, has now turned something as simple and obvious as wearing a mask inside a building into a political debate and, is now turning both high school and college sports, as well as something as basic as whether we put kids back in school full-time into one as well. But, unfortunately, it's the country we live in. Regardless, from here on I will do my best to post in as apolitical a style as possible. 8)

Next, 7Times... First, I don't think the world is ending. Nor have I insinuated as much. Next, my posts are as long as they are because one, in relation to this topic, you and the others on that side of the debate post so much stuff that is inaccurate that it takes that much verbiage to refute it all. And, if I'm saying the "same old thing" in many of my posts, it's because you guys repeats the same tired old arguments for why you feel the way you do. So, I feel the need to continually respond to those same old points because, if you think that by repeating it enough times I'll simply choose not to respond, well... I obviously enjoy a good debate, along with having plenty of time to engage at the moment. Second, when I make points or, ask you to respond to a question in a specific manner, funny, you guys choose not to ever respond/answer the question with the specificity required. You know, like the fact I've literally asked you, grindian, and Goldy what the actual number of unnecessary/preventable deaths is to justify not having youth/amateur sports/open up the economy is.. :P Third, you may not understand this but, the most successful people in life understand that the details matter. It's how you win a debate. You should try it sometime.

However, I do believe in science, and I'm confident I have the appropriate perspective in regards to whether the needs of the many (the thousands of still likely preventable deaths) outweigh the needs of the few (playing youth/amateur sports) or the one. As for your comment that, "You have no idea what any of us do or what kinds of decisions we make so so don't comment on that", I'm sorry but, I re-read my entire previous post three times and I honestly don't see where anything I stated could be misconstrued for what you seem to think it does. Again, this is where the details matter as you don't provide any context for what you're trying to say.

As I've already stated at least three times, no one is saying education isn't essential. What some of us are saying is that the importance of education has to be considered within the nuance of the pandemic and, how putting kids back in class either part or full-time increases the risk of transmission to people other than students. And yes, a distance learning program done on the fly within a two week period by people who've never taught within that realm, was far from ideal. However, don't you think that given the fact there was a strong possibility that they'd have to do on-line learning again, coupled with having three full months to improve it, that it will probably be much improved? You call me a fatalist... :roll:

And, to make this post even longer, I noticed none of you guys weighed in on the Ashland hockey camp outbreak...
This WOM post better be deleted. The whole first paragraph is political. I posted solid information that refuted his point and that was deleted so I don't know why we let his pointless ramblings go on.

You assumed you knew what kind of decisions we make or what kinds of positions we hold. I quote "I’m sorry, so the Buffalo principle didn’t state it exactly the way YOU think she should’ve but, when you, Goldy, grindian, and 7Times, have to actually put YOUR fannies and livelihoods on the actual line from a decision-making standpoint, we’ll see how YOU react. You guys are freaking unbelievable. How about trying to walk a day in a person’s shoes before you criticize them." I will say it again. You don't know what we do or what decisions we make do you?

Speaking of inaccurate verbiage it is too bad we can't discuss TCJA. Your statements there were littered with it.

The number of deaths I am willing to accept is a 2% to 4% increase from what would happen otherwise. But I have addressed that question in the past but apparently you can't read or something. Now you want to answer my question of how you are going to know every person on earth has been vaccinated so that you can leave your house? Read below please. Only study I can find that estimates the impact of having open schools. Another interesting note is that when school is closed they spend more time out in the community and have more contact with family members (including the grandparents that you talk about living with all these kids).

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medica ... li=BBnb7Kz

Hunters1993
Posts: 415
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2020 9:22 am

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by Hunters1993 » Thu Jul 16, 2020 10:53 pm

Try using data from significant sources. Whenever I find data I take a good look at which site I’m on.

LA Times?

Try .org sites.
Medical sites

For starters. Newspapers don’t rank anywhere near top of reliable sources. Try CDC, MN Dept of Health. Or a medical journal and get back to us.
#KEEPTHEKIDSINTHECLASSROOM

7TIMECHAMPS
Posts: 279
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 8:58 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by 7TIMECHAMPS » Fri Jul 17, 2020 5:30 am

Hunters1993 wrote:
Thu Jul 16, 2020 10:53 pm
Try using data from significant sources. Whenever I find data I take a good look at which site I’m on.

LA Times?

Try .org sites.
Medical sites

For starters. Newspapers don’t rank anywhere near top of reliable sources. Try CDC, MN Dept of Health. Or a medical journal and get back to us.
Did you read the article? The study was done by the Imperial College of London. They are considered one of the top Universities in the world and have informed several government’s responses. Talk about sticking your head in the sand.

I really don’t even know how to respond to this. Shocked at the response here Hunter. Maybe read the article and then tell me what part you don’t believe and why. They cite most of their sources in the article so you tell me which one is unreliable.

7TIMECHAMPS
Posts: 279
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 8:58 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by 7TIMECHAMPS » Fri Jul 17, 2020 7:30 am

Hunters1993 wrote:
Thu Jul 16, 2020 10:53 pm
Try using data from significant sources. Whenever I find data I take a good look at which site I’m on.

LA Times?

Try .org sites.
Medical sites

For starters. Newspapers don’t rank anywhere near top of reliable sources. Try CDC, MN Dept of Health. Or a medical journal and get back to us.
Alright Hunter here you go. Interview 3 days ago with the director of the CDC on schools opening. Summary related to this conversation is that Redford supports opening schools, kids most often aren't spreaders of the virus, and the relative risk is very small for kids (smaller than the flu, his words not mine). I will post the excerpt of the interview that I am referencing below and a link as well. Now for all the times you have touted science as the basis for your stances you aren't going to go back on that now are you? You asked for the CDC and I gave it to you. Do you agree with the Director of the CDC that schools should be open?

Van Susteren: Alright, let me turn to schools, which is a huge issue here in this country. Is that what's, how do you figure out whether to open schools, not to open schools? We have got public health, we've got the economy, we've got school we got this this tough balance, and I guess for a starter question, do kids transmit to kids? 

Redfield: You know, right now we don't have a lot of evidence that kids are a critical component of what we call the transmission cycle of this virus. 

Van Susteren: And that would include to adults, too? 

Redfield: Yeah, unlike flu, where we know that, you know, childhood school transmission of flu can really see outbreaks in the community. We really don't have that evidence or we don't have it in our household studies that we've done where we've looked at who's bringing the virus into the household, it's usually the adult that's bringing the virus into the household. 

The other thing that we know is that children, really, one of the things that's unique about this virus is it can go anything from nothing, no symptoms, all the way to make you critically ill and need to be intubated. The spectrum of illness, as Tony says, as I say, is really the largest we've ever seen. ... 

Van Susteren: ...does damage on different organs and might be your heart and my lungs ...

Redfield: ...very large and as you said, it's got some interesting complications with causing coagulopathies and problem with different organs. When we look at kids in general, and individuals under the age of 45, pretty much in the absence of significant medical conditions, this is really an asymptomatic illness. We've looked at the individuals under 18, we've had 52, I think, individuals under 18 that have died, many of which have other comorbidities, out of the first say, 118,000 that we've looked at. So if you look at that, the risk of mortality for individuals under 18 right now is about 0.1 per 100,000, or about 1 in a million with the data that we have right now. As opposed to those people that are over 75, where the risk is really much, much greater, about 3,000 per 100,000. 

Van Susteren: So do you feel comfortable opening schools and even if  --you feel absolutely? 

Redfield: Absolutely.

Van Susteren: You feel absolutely, comfortable? 

Redfield: What I feel is this, it has to be done safely. My biggest concern about opening schools is making sure we protect the vulnerable, that we're protecting the teachers, and we're protecting the children that are vulnerable. I would argue that the public health risk, because I don't think it's public health versus opening schools. I think it's public health versus public health. I think the public health risks to K-12, if continuing to have these schools closed is real. Whether it's the absence of mental health services for the 7.1 million kids who get their mental health service in school, whether it's in nutritional services that some of the kids get, whether it's the fact that this is where most of our mandatory reporting for sexual abuse and child abuse is, whether it's the impact of socialization, whether it's really a lot of kids just learn better face to face. 

So when I look at the relative risk of say death of COVID(-19) among kids and compare that to the relative risk of flu, you're far more likely as a child to die from flu. And that's even in an environment where we have a vaccine that if you took, you wouldn't have been at risk. So, I think it really is time. 

Now each jurisdiction is going to have to work through it. They're going to have to figure out exactly, you know, we've given guidance. And that's just what it is, it's guidance. I've said it’s guidance to help facilitate the opening of schools. And I don’t want to see it be as a guidance that's a rationale to keep schools closed. And we'll work with the school districts on how to take our guidance and operationalize it in a practical way to get these schools open. But yes, I think it is, from strictly a public health point of view, I'm not going to get into the larger debate but from a public health point of view, I think it is extremely important that we open these schools. The vigilance though, it has to be there, is to make sure we're protecting the vulnerable teachers, making sure we have alternatives for children that are vulnerable because of their medical conditions. But I think we can do this in a very thoughtful safe way. 


https://www.voanews.com/covid-19-pandem ... irus-fight

Hunters1993
Posts: 415
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2020 9:22 am

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by Hunters1993 » Fri Jul 17, 2020 7:48 am

Some good info in there, absolutely!

Ok the first paragraph of the article is a great place to start. It states that if everyone wears a mask they would feel very comfortable opening the schools. IF, everyone wears a mask. IS everyone wearing a mask? As I have said previously if you go to the bathroom you wash your hands. If you cough you cover your face! And right now if you leave your house you wear a mask. iF that is made a mandate I feel the same way they do tgat schools should be opened up.

Ok. So very few kids have died from the disease. That is great news! Absolutely! Now let’s look at the other part of that paragraph. The one that says there are organ damage and long term effects to the body of those who catch this. So kids who catch this could very well have long term damage to the body if they do catch this.

The main group catching this thing right now are 20-40 year olds and that group of people have children. This group are those who are going back to life as normal when this is not the time for that. Risk takers and the movers and the shakers who can bring it back to their homes, children, share with grandparents.


There was also a spot where they talked about each school district is going to need to look at their current situation and adjust the return to school based on current data. School is not going to be back to normal school. There are three options out there all online, hybrid, and back to normal. Each district is going to be responsible to make their decisions while still following their State guidance.

So where exactly do you feel like you proved anything again! This is the same things I have been saying. Great to see you reading reliable sources on COVID-19
#KEEPTHEKIDSINTHECLASSROOM

Hunters1993
Posts: 415
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2020 9:22 am

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by Hunters1993 » Fri Jul 17, 2020 7:51 am

https://www.voanews.com/covid-19-pandem ... xpert-says


Take a look at this one!

Put your mask on everyone and in two weeks the pandemic numbers would drop dramatically! Winter sports would be a guarantee!
#KEEPTHEKIDSINTHECLASSROOM

7TIMECHAMPS
Posts: 279
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 8:58 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by 7TIMECHAMPS » Fri Jul 17, 2020 8:06 am

Hunters1993 wrote:
Fri Jul 17, 2020 7:48 am
Some good info in there, absolutely!

Ok the first paragraph of the article is a great place to start. It states that if everyone wears a mask they would feel very comfortable opening the schools. IF, everyone wears a mask. IS everyone wearing a mask? As I have said previously if you go to the bathroom you wash your hands. If you cough you cover your face! And right now if you leave your house you wear a mask. iF that is made a mandate I feel the same way they do tgat schools should be opened up.

Ok. So very few kids have died from the disease. That is great news! Absolutely! Now let’s look at the other part of that paragraph. The one that says there are organ damage and long term effects to the body of those who catch this. So kids who catch this could very well have long term damage to the body if they do catch this.

The main group catching this thing right now are 20-40 year olds and that group of people have children. This group are those who are going back to life as normal when this is not the time for that. Risk takers and the movers and the shakers who can bring it back to their homes, children, share with grandparents.


There was also a spot where they talked about each school district is going to need to look at their current situation and adjust the return to school based on current data. School is not going to be back to normal school. There are three options out there all online, hybrid, and back to normal. Each district is going to be responsible to make their decisions while still following their State guidance.

So where exactly do you feel like you proved anything again! This is the same things I have been saying. Great to see you reading reliable sources on COVID-19
I don't disagree with wearing masks. I think that would be a positive that would help keep society open. And a real possibility in MN. I don't believe that I have said otherwise.

As to what I think this proves I think that it proves that school and activities should go on as normal starting this fall. Mr Redford wasn't referencing the 3 options when he said kids should be back in schools. He was referencing in person classes and specifically that the reward outweighs the risk in the case of schools. So I guess I am glad to hear that we are in agreement that as long as proper precautions are taken school and activities should go on this fall. Love to hear it.

Hunters1993
Posts: 415
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2020 9:22 am

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by Hunters1993 » Fri Jul 17, 2020 8:21 am

This is directly from the article!
When it says each jurisdiction will have to work through how to open is referencing online, hybrid, and back to normal. In places with high cases might have to do hybrid or online and those with few cases may be back to normal. One size will not fit all when opening school again.

Now each jurisdiction is going to have to work through it. They're going to have to figure out exactly, you know, we've given guidance. And that's just what it is, it's guidance. I've said it’s guidance to help facilitate the opening of schools. And I don’t want to see it be as a guidance that's a rationale to keep schools closed. And we'll work with the school districts on how to take our guidance and operationalize it in a practical way to get these schools open.
#KEEPTHEKIDSINTHECLASSROOM

OldManRiver
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 4:31 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by OldManRiver » Fri Jul 17, 2020 8:29 am

First, to OldManRiver... I’m sorry, so the Buffalo principle didn’t state it exactly the way YOU think she should’ve but, when you, Goldy, grindian, and 7Times, have to actually put YOUR fannies and livelihoods on the actual line from a decision-making standpoint, we’ll see how YOU react. You guys are freaking unbelievable. How about trying to walk a day in a person’s shoes before you criticize them. As she/he said, extracurriculars — as beneficial as we know they are — ARE A PRIVILEGE and NOT A RIGHT! Remember, they are sitting in rooms listening to the best medical experts in our state and, even nationally, in educating themselves in regards to making the best decisions possible
As I said in my original post ( a part which you skipped for some reason) - "I'm sure there are a myriad of valid reasons why not holding sports right now makes the most sense - but to drop it all on a "don't play or kids will die" type of ultimatum just shows an incredible lack of knowledge about a truly complex issue."

So if you're calling me out because I said it shows an incredible lack of knowledge about a truly complex issue to say that kids who play sports are going to die, which is the exact argument the Buffalo Assistant Principal (let's get the title and spelling correct at least) made, then I guess we're at a point where you are ignoring science and data and we are not going to agree.

Oh, and not that it matters, I am responsible in my daily life for actions and decisions which directly impact more than 6,000 employees and members, so my response to this is exactly how someone who "actually put YOUR fannies and livelihoods on the actual line from a decision-making standpoints" reacts.

7TIMECHAMPS
Posts: 279
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 8:58 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by 7TIMECHAMPS » Fri Jul 17, 2020 9:04 am

Hunters1993 wrote:
Fri Jul 17, 2020 8:21 am
This is directly from the article!
When it says each jurisdiction will have to work through how to open is referencing online, hybrid, and back to normal. In places with high cases might have to do hybrid or online and those with few cases may be back to normal. One size will not fit all when opening school again.

Now each jurisdiction is going to have to work through it. They're going to have to figure out exactly, you know, we've given guidance. And that's just what it is, it's guidance. I've said it’s guidance to help facilitate the opening of schools. And I don’t want to see it be as a guidance that's a rationale to keep schools closed. And we'll work with the school districts on how to take our guidance and operationalize it in a practical way to get these schools open.
I am sorry but I have read it several times and don't see how you make the interpretation that he is saying some schools should stay online or even hybrid. He says that each jurisdiction will have to work through the guidance to "get open". You are putting words in his mouth adding the online/hybrid part. Seems like a stretch (or do I even say just not true?) to say that he meant some schools should not go back based on his statement. Let's stick to what he actually said. Pretty clear to me that he thinks schools should open. Not online.

Wise Old Man
Posts: 340
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2019 8:11 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by Wise Old Man » Fri Jul 17, 2020 10:19 am

Ok folks — first, as I think we’re all aware of, the challenge with communicating/debating via the written word is that we all tend to put a certain meaning on words and phrasing that might not be intended by the author. Especially as it relates to these types of forums and specifically these types of debates where everyone has a fairly strong emotionalized opinion. I’m being dead serious here, I honestly have no doubt that all of you are probably very good people and, the fact you’re even spending any time posting here indicates you care about kids and sports in general. Which is a very good thing. I suspect I would enjoy having a beer with all of you. :wink: So, allow me to be the first to apologize as I know when actually typing some responses on this thread the last month or so, I know I chose language not only in response to how the way I interpreted what was written (vs what the author intended) but, I also chose specific words or phrases to elicit a response, I.e. “get some of you going”. Again, I apologize.

After thinking about this some more, despite the perceived connection to having kids back in school in some form to sports being able to resume, I’ve come to believe that the decision to return kids to school actually should be considered separately from kids returning to sports. More on this in a bit.

7Times... I genuinely appreciate your response and the article/transcript of the Redfield interview. I realize including all that can be time consuming but, it’s that type of detail that truly improves the level of discussion/debate. To be fair though, I think I’ve been pretty consistent in stating that the science at this moment (we all know how much our knowledge of the virus has continued to change over the last 7 months) clearly shows that the risk of actual negative health outcomes for kids is very small. Obviously, my bigger point has been about the potential risk of direct spread from kids to both teachers and/or more susceptible people at their homes, be they parents or grandparents. And yes, I’ve also acknowledged that a lot of current science about whether or not school-age kids actually spread the virus, indicates they aren’t as strong of vectors as adults.

However, the challenge is that, just because the science indicates kids aren’t very good vectors doesn’t mean that the older, more vulnerable teachers are going to accept that reduced risk if they are forced/asked to go back into schools either part or full time. As I’ve mentioned previously, I’m friends with a local assistant principal in my area — a fairly good sized, multi-school district — and he has recently told me that almost every one of the district’s older teachers (50 plus) have decided that, if schools are back in session in either a hybrid or normal model, they will choose to retire. If that happens, there is no way the district could even do a hybrid model.

Wise Old Man
Posts: 340
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2019 8:11 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by Wise Old Man » Fri Jul 17, 2020 10:21 am

Sorry guys, I’m on my phone and fat-thumbed the “submit” button. 😎 Will finish my response in a bit!

Hunters1993
Posts: 415
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2020 9:22 am

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by Hunters1993 » Fri Jul 17, 2020 10:33 am

Now each JURISDICTION is going to have to work through it. They're going to have to figure out exactly, you know, we've given guidance. And that's just what it is, it's guidance. I've said it’s guidance to help facilitate the opening of schools. And I don’t want to see it be as a guidance that's a rationale to keep schools closed. And we'll work with the SCHOOL DISTRICT on how to take our guidance and operationalize it in a practical way to get these schools open.

They’re going to have to figure out exactly.........
Take guidance and operationalize it.................


Isnt he saying that each district has to operationalize it based on their situation! What do these sentences mean to you. Give me your interpretation.
#KEEPTHEKIDSINTHECLASSROOM

Hunters1993
Posts: 415
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2020 9:22 am

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by Hunters1993 » Fri Jul 17, 2020 10:44 am

CDC backs conversation previously entered. Explains the guidance portion of conversation.

All may start open and normal. Then when cases show up and they will the CDC guidance. Communities with very few cases will do things differently then those with many cases!

CDC guidance

Guidance for child care programs and schools is organized into three categories based on the level of community transmission: 1) when there is no community transmission (preparedness phase), 2) when there is minimal to moderate community transmission, and 3) when there is substantial community transmission.
Guidance is also provided for when a confirmed case has entered a school, regardless of the level of community transmission.
All decisions about implementing school-based strategies (e.g., dismissals, event cancellations, other social distancing measures) should be made locally, in collaboration with local health officials who can help determine the level of transmission in the community. Information about level of transmission is available in
#KEEPTHEKIDSINTHECLASSROOM

7TIMECHAMPS
Posts: 279
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 8:58 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by 7TIMECHAMPS » Fri Jul 17, 2020 11:37 am

Hunters1993 wrote:
Fri Jul 17, 2020 10:33 am
Now each JURISDICTION is going to have to work through it. They're going to have to figure out exactly, you know, we've given guidance. And that's just what it is, it's guidance. I've said it’s guidance to help facilitate the opening of schools. And I don’t want to see it be as a guidance that's a rationale to keep schools closed. And we'll work with the SCHOOL DISTRICT on how to take our guidance and operationalize it in a practical way to get these schools open.

They’re going to have to figure out exactly.........
Take guidance and operationalize it.................


Isnt he saying that each district has to operationalize it based on their situation! What do these sentences mean to you. Give me your interpretation.
My interpretation is that every school should plan to open. If their area has an outbreak they should address it accordingly, which may include a temporary shut down to disinfect etc. I do not interpret the guidance to endorse the sort of decision that says we are just going online this year. There is nothing in the guidance that says if you have a high number of cases now that you should be looking at online as your strategy for the year. I anticipate that there will be lumps/choppiness to the school year. But I would think more in terms of snow days versus shutting down for the year in case we get a blizzard.

It has actually been proposed that each district in MN be able to decide for themselves. My concern is that Walz doesn't go for it and orders all schools closed. That would be a tragedy, especially for some of the rural districts that could be sitting there with no active cases (or in LOW county so far no cases period).

blueblood
Posts: 2620
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 8:36 am

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by blueblood » Fri Jul 17, 2020 12:05 pm

WOM, 7Time and Hunters:

Thanks for the input. This discussion seems to have progressed past the early emotional responses from April/May.

Let's face it, COVID is here to stay. Shuttering down is bad for everyone. Local governments, school districts, business, families; and persons are going to need the flexibility to decide what is their proper course of response. Kids in the classroom are, IMO, a must not only for educational purposes, but for their emotional and mental health well being. Teachers who retire, need not be chastised, but they need not use the scare tactics of death either.

Before you all throw stones, my chosen profession requires travel. Trust me, it can be done safely in the presence of large groups of persons.
Play Like a Champion Today

Hunters1993
Posts: 415
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2020 9:22 am

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by Hunters1993 » Fri Jul 17, 2020 2:36 pm

I would imagine the schools can decide to start all open. But with outbreaks in the classroom there will be very specific guidelines. My guess would be a hybrid for large amounts of the year for any schools with outbreaks. And after several shutdowns for deep cleaning would lead to online.

Please look at prior post of CDC guidelines that I attracted with directions not suggestions.
#KEEPTHEKIDSINTHECLASSROOM

goldy313
Posts: 3949
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2002 11:56 am

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by goldy313 » Fri Jul 17, 2020 10:30 pm

If you look at the Johns Hopkins website, as a country we were trending down with rates comparable to Germany until June 14th or so, then we ratcheted up the infection rate like the entire country was a meat packing plant. Clearly opening bars up coincided with massive protests to create this growth.

The infection rates are much larger in urban areas than rural areas, and in younger people the rate is outpacing that of older people. The narrative that “Trumpers” are driving the higher infection rates don’t hold up to political modeling. We are all responsible for the increase, the msm somehow fail to mention that California is in the same situation as Florida and Texas.

Per the Olmsted County Health Department, by race “blacks” make up 7.8% of the population yet account for 34.8% of Covid-19 positive cases in the county. People between ages 20-29 make up almost 30% of all cases. Draw your own conclusions.....

People living in multi-generational housing, those in low income housing, and those in congregate living are at a much higher risk. How that isn’t a main talking point baffles me. It is pretty obvious that college housing presents a huge problem area, that said how can college football proceed?

In Minnesota in 2 of the last 5 years there have been more deaths due to influenza to people not in long term care facilities than Covid -19 has caused to that same population thus far. We need protect those most at risk, school age kids are not of that group and year in and year out are much more likely to die of influenza or a host of other disorders.

Locked