Big Ten’s reversal leaves safety out

Do you have a good reason college football must be played?

Not too long ago, the Big Ten Conference took the high road. It wasn’t going to play politics with a game. It wasn’t going to take unnecessary risks to play during a global pandemic. It wasn’t about to bow to political pressure, not even from the White House.

Rutgers University president Jonathan Holloway, who played college football at Stanford, said the conference’s decision to postpone football season until early next year would give it a chance to “learn about the science, different kinds of tests and potential vac

cines” for the coronavirus that has caused nearly 200,000 U.S. deaths this year.

Those upset with the move wanted more of an explanation, better reasons.

“The virus has revealed things that many of us have known to be true for a long time, but now we can’t hide from that fact,” Holloway told NJ.com. “And when it comes to what is the value proposition of college football across the country, the virus has revealed the truth here about how different conferences are navigating that space. And I’m very happy to be in the Big Ten.”

In other words, those reckless scoundrels from football-crazed conference like the SEC and Big 12 have warped values.

Well, warp speed ahead a couple weeks, and now the Big Ten has reshaped its values. It will begin playing football games in October.

People who were upset at the league postponing games don’t need any reasons now.

While the Big Ten’s messaging has been horrid — commissioner Kevin Warren declared forcefully that the initial decision to push fall sports back would not be revisited — this is more a question of how the league could have gotten such a major decision so wrong.

And let’s not act as if any of us know which decision was wrong, the one to cancel or the one to play. I certainly don’t.

I also haven’t heard a good reason why any of these nonprofessional games must be played.

How did we get to a place where whether a conference plays football games is a national discussion worthy of presidential involvement?

To that point, ABC News reported that the White House offered to supply the Big Ten with tests if it elected to put players on the field this fall.

“I called the commissioner a couple of weeks ago, and we started putting a lot of pressure on, frankly, because there was no reason for it not to come back,” President Donald Trump said Wednesday. No reason, huh? With the virus running free on many college campuses, including several Big Ten schools — Iowa entered the week with a whopping 1,800 positives for COVID-19 — the safest move for all concerned would be to wait to play football next fall when COVID-19 likely is to be better under control.

Yes, the schools will take measures to make everyone as safe as they can. But must they? Just so we can see a few football games?

That is pretty much the dictionary definition of unnecessary.

But sure, I’ll watch and enjoy.

While the odds are low that the Big Ten’s reversal will end tragically for a participant, there could be dire consequences for some, and we might not know what true damage is done by the virus for years.

A young, healthy, fit-asa-fiddle friend of mine had COVID-19 nearly three months ago, and she still can’t smell or taste anything. An otherwise healthy friend was in intensive care during his battle with the virus, and his body hasn’t been right since.

The Big Ten will have stringent daily testing with every player, coach and trainer. A positive test will lead to an immediate second test. If that one is positive, the participant will be out for at least 21 days.

If a team’s overall positive rate exceeds 5 percent, it must shut down for at least seven days.

Northwestern University president Morton Schapiro said he grappled with the question of playing football when so much of the school is closed to students. Normally, freshmen and sophomores are required to stay in residence halls on campus, but not this year. They need special exemptions to even come onto campus.

Of course, football players are at the front of the line for said exemptions. Their presence is “necessary.”

“At the end of the day, I found the arguments that if we could do it safely … there’s no reason not to go ahead and do it,” Schapiro said.

One would expect a more definitive answer than a “might as well” response, considering the stakes.

“Doing it safely” is a stretch in describing football period, let alone in 2020. Schools can’t bubble their players like the NBA. Practicing, playing and traveling to games can’t possibly be as safe as not practicing, not playing and not traveling to games.

But they’re doing it because … there is no reason not to?

Give me a better reason. Please.