USA TODAY International Edition

College football should opt for spring season

Does the sport’s entertainm­ent value, financial benefits outweigh welfare of players?

- Tim Sullivan

LOUISVILLE, Ky. – Twenty- six of the football players at Kentucky’s three Football Bowl Subdivisio­n schools are listed at 300 pounds or more.

Every one of them is obese as defined by the body mass index tables of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Every one of them, therefore, is at elevated risk of COVID- 19.

So before America’s universiti­es resume a high- contact sport pervasivel­y played by enormous people, it’s worth asking how high a price they are prepared to pay. It’s worth asking whether football’s entertainm­ent value and financial benefits outweigh the welfare of its players.

These are questions that have been largely glossed over in the frantic search for conditions that can make football feasible during a pandemic. The stated goal is to follow protocols that make the game as safe as possible. Unstated, but no less pertinent, is whether the game can be made safe enough to survive the season.

Perhaps that’s not sufficiently optimistic to suit Rand Paul, but University of Illinois computer science professor Sheldon Jacobson has told CBS Sports to expect a 30%- 50% infection rate among the Football Bowl Subdivisio­n’s 13,000 players, with between three and seven deaths attributab­le to COVID- 19.

“A few of them could end up in the hospital, and you’ll have a small number who could die,” Jacobson said. “I don’t want to sugar coat for you. I just want to give you the facts. ... If everybody comes together under normal circumstan­ces, we’ll probably see that kind of outcome.”

In a word, yikes.

Already, several schools have decided to take a football sabbatical rather than tempt fate this fall: Division II Morehouse College and Division III’s Bowdoin College and Rensselaer Polytechni­c.

At least three Power Five conference schools – LSU, Clemson and Texas – have had 20 or more players test positive or quarantine­d. And that’s been during “voluntary” workouts, before organized contact drills.

“How can we go forward with a season, given what we know about the virus, and think we won’t accelerate transmissi­on?” Morehouse President David Thomas asked in an interview with Sports Illustrate­d.

How, indeed?

The Ivy League is reportedly considerin­g two scenarios. One would limit its 2020 season to seven conference games. The other would shift that condensed schedule to April and May.

With numerous states experienci­ng significant spikes in coronaviru­s cases, and no solution in sight, prudence demands that caution take priority over commercial considerat­ions. Since college athletes do not draw a salary in return for the risks they assume, extreme caution would seem appropriat­e.

South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster warned last Wednesday that he will not lift a state ban on spectator sports, “if these numbers continue to rise and the danger persists.”

“I can’t do it. I won’t do it,” McMaster said. “This fall will not be like other falls. We will not be able to have college football. We will not be able to have high school football.”

There is no guarantee, of course, that a spring season would be safer. There is no guarantee that delaying the start of the season until next spring will produce a vaccine or allow for additional attendance.

It would surely disrupt football’s normal flow, playing havoc with spring practice and potentiall­y squeezing two seasons into a troublingl­y tight window.

Still, if postponeme­nt can ease the burden on medical profession­als and testing supplies while buying time for science to find answers, those considerat­ions probably ought to outrank shortterm financial concerns and the preservati­on of traditiona­l timetables.

“Every safe option should be considered, knowing the impact that football has on college athletics,” University of Louisville athletic director Vince Tyra said Wednesday. “If the time comes, I’m sure that option will be formally vetted for safety as much as economics.”

Athletic department­s are so dependent on football that any delay, interrupti­on or revenue shortfall can carry ruinous ripples.

The University of Michigan is projecting a $ 51.6 million revenue decline for the 2020 fiscal year.

The University of Connecticu­t, which reported a $ 42 million athletic deficit before the virus hit, dropped four sports last week.

Pressure to maintain cash flow will likely influence whatever decisions get made about college football in 2020. It would be shameful if it should cause universiti­es to gamble with the health of their athletes.

 ?? MATT STONE/ THE COURIER JOURNAL ?? College football fans might not have the option to attend games this fall because of the coronaviru­s pandemic.
MATT STONE/ THE COURIER JOURNAL College football fans might not have the option to attend games this fall because of the coronaviru­s pandemic.
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States