2020 BSC Football canceled

[catgradtimes2]

What I don’t get from day one is how the public continues to let the government tell them what they can and can’t do? I’m not saying this flu isn’t bad and it can kill people with underlying health issues, but why the hell does that have anything to do with it? Why can’t I choose to go to game a game? Let me take the risk to go to the games, or if if I’m a player and I’m choosing to play, let me decide.
Before the mob starts, let me say if your uncomfortable going to places then don’t go, don’t ****** go. Don’t punish willing people if they want to take that risk. The crazies will say, “well you are putting others at risk” that point is moot because if they are so concerned about it don’t go anywhere. Don’t punish willing and able bodies from enjoying things. If you stay away because you are so concerned, well then you have nothing to worry about it. Perfect example of that was at Laurel earlier this year when I was playing golf. A crazie came off 13 tee to tell me not to touch the flag. The guy was never gonna touch the flag because he does what he is told, but if he was never going to touch the flag anyways why the hell would he care?
My wife is a pregnant nurse and she brought up a good point the other night. She said “ you know masks are a joke right”? I said what do mean? She said, “they make us cover our noses and mouth, but they don’t make us cover our eyes”. Then it hit me, eyes are open and they are the leading causes for spreading diseases. This is a crazy time we live in and the hypocrisy is so thick you can cut it with a knife.

Shame on everybody that thinks we are doing a good thing right now, because we are just prolonging this flu for another five years.

With all due respect to you wife's guess on the eyes thing, but while it's true that a best scenario would be face shields and masks, CV 19 has not been proven to be contracted by aerosolised virus droplets to the eyes...while it's pretty conclusive to be lung contamination.

Then why this article about Fauci suggesting goggles. And if anyone not wearing masks is selfish, are people who aren’t wearing goggles now selfish as well? Seems like they should be.

But we’ll continue picking and choosing what is the right thing to do with this virus and bash anyone who doesn’t agree.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.health ... 3famp=true

Could you imagine the outrage if there were government mandates for masks and goggles? We can't even currently agree on the effectiveness of one. And, I swear at this point even if there was a study that undeniably proved masks granted you three wishes from your own personal genie that there would still be a very vocal minority that doubted their effectiveness.

This particular Fauci study and actually most of Fauci's statements continue to help to prove one thing and that's how divided this country is. Do I think goggles would help, sure. Do I think masks help, sure. But, convincing everyone to do these things so they are most effective is an impossible effort. Compared to a number of other "first-world" countries we suck at fighting this virus, and while questionable leadership plays a part, the citizens following a long plays a big part too.

[catsrback76]

What I don’t get from day one is how the public continues to let the government tell them what they can and can’t do? I’m not saying this flu isn’t bad and it can kill people with underlying health issues, but why the hell does that have anything to do with it? Why can’t I choose to go to game a game? Let me take the risk to go to the games, or if if I’m a player and I’m choosing to play, let me decide.
Before the mob starts, let me say if your uncomfortable going to places then don’t go, don’t ****** go. Don’t punish willing people if they want to take that risk. The crazies will say, “well you are putting others at risk” that point is moot because if they are so concerned about it don’t go anywhere. Don’t punish willing and able bodies from enjoying things. If you stay away because you are so concerned, well then you have nothing to worry about it. Perfect example of that was at Laurel earlier this year when I was playing golf. A crazie came off 13 tee to tell me not to touch the flag. The guy was never gonna touch the flag because he does what he is told, but if he was never going to touch the flag anyways why the hell would he care?
My wife is a pregnant nurse and she brought up a good point the other night. She said “ you know masks are a joke right”? I said what do mean? She said, “they make us cover our noses and mouth, but they don’t make us cover our eyes”. Then it hit me, eyes are open and they are the leading causes for spreading diseases. This is a crazy time we live in and the hypocrisy is so thick you can cut it with a knife.

Shame on everybody that thinks we are doing a good thing right now, because we are just prolonging this flu for another five years.

People won't wear masks so I don't know how you could convince them to wear goggles. Plain and simple, it is about trying to control spread, and even though you are willing to take the risk, you could be asymptomatic and don't know. This is exactly why the limits on groups. As for masks, no one ever said they were 100%, but they do make a difference when used along with social distancing...and adding googles would even make it better.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/2020 ... t-covid-19

[ilovethecats]

What I don’t get from day one is how the public continues to let the government tell them what they can and can’t do? I’m not saying this flu isn’t bad and it can kill people with underlying health issues, but why the hell does that have anything to do with it? Why can’t I choose to go to game a game? Let me take the risk to go to the games, or if if I’m a player and I’m choosing to play, let me decide.
Before the mob starts, let me say if your uncomfortable going to places then don’t go, don’t ****** go. Don’t punish willing people if they want to take that risk. The crazies will say, “well you are putting others at risk” that point is moot because if they are so concerned about it don’t go anywhere. Don’t punish willing and able bodies from enjoying things. If you stay away because you are so concerned, well then you have nothing to worry about it. Perfect example of that was at Laurel earlier this year when I was playing golf. A crazie came off 13 tee to tell me not to touch the flag. The guy was never gonna touch the flag because he does what he is told, but if he was never going to touch the flag anyways why the hell would he care?
My wife is a pregnant nurse and she brought up a good point the other night. She said “ you know masks are a joke right”? I said what do mean? She said, “they make us cover our noses and mouth, but they don’t make us cover our eyes”. Then it hit me, eyes are open and they are the leading causes for spreading diseases. This is a crazy time we live in and the hypocrisy is so thick you can cut it with a knife.

Shame on everybody that thinks we are doing a good thing right now, because we are just prolonging this flu for another five years.

People won't wear masks so I don't know how you could convince them to wear goggles. Plain and simple, it is about trying to control spread, and even though you are willing to take the risk, you could be asymptomatic and don't know. This is exactly why the limits on groups. As for masks, no one ever said they were 100%, but they do make a difference when used along with social distancing...and adding googles would even make it better.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/2020 ... t-covid-19

I guess I was more speaking to the fact that if we know goggles work, like we know masks work; and we’re required to wear masks, why are we not required to wear goggles?

And if they DO require goggles, can I assume that all of those that swear by masks will happily begin donning goggles? Or to go a step farther, why don’t I see everyone already wearing goggles? They could save lives.....

[Colter_Nuanez]

[ND0479]

I pray the answer is no, but is there ANY way that BSC pulls this same move again? I really think not for a couple reasons - 1) the Fall season still happened just about everywhere else. 2) A lot of schools couldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or fans.

I don't really know what the situation is outside of where I am (TX), but with HS football kicking off this week, game cancellations are happening fast and furious due to Covid. 6 on Monday, 11 on Tuesday, up to 21 today. That's a very small percentage overall, but still concerning.

[Cataholic]

I pray the answer is no, but is there ANY way that BSC pulls this same move again? I really think not for a couple reasons - 1) the Fall season still happened just about everywhere else. 2) A lot of schools couldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or fans.

I don't really know what the situation is outside of where I am (TX), but with HS football kicking off this week, game cancellations are happening fast and furious due to Covid. 6 on Monday, 11 on Tuesday, up to 21 today. That's a very small percentage overall, but still concerning.

I saw the subject line and my heart skipped a beat. Then I noticed it was in reference to last year!!

[coloradocat]

I pray the answer is no, but is there ANY way that BSC pulls this same move again? I really think not for a couple reasons - 1) the Fall season still happened just about everywhere else. 2) A lot of schools couldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or fans.

I don't really know what the situation is outside of where I am (TX), but with HS football kicking off this week, game cancellations are happening fast and furious due to Covid. 6 on Monday, 11 on Tuesday, up to 21 today. That's a very small percentage overall, but still concerning.

Schools shouldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or no fans. If you don't want to play and/or don't want live attendance then you should just fold your program. I would hope that donors would tell the schools that they won't be supporting them any further.

[ND0479]

I pray the answer is no, but is there ANY way that BSC pulls this same move again? I really think not for a couple reasons - 1) the Fall season still happened just about everywhere else. 2) A lot of schools couldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or fans.

I don't really know what the situation is outside of where I am (TX), but with HS football kicking off this week, game cancellations are happening fast and furious due to Covid. 6 on Monday, 11 on Tuesday, up to 21 today. That's a very small percentage overall, but still concerning.

Schools shouldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or no fans. If you don't want to play and/or don't want live attendance then you should just fold your program. I would hope that donors would tell the schools that they won't be supporting them any further.

I agree with that, but it’s the same people in charge that made the wrong decision last time, whether the schools wanted it or not. That’s my concern.

[coloradocat]

I pray the answer is no, but is there ANY way that BSC pulls this same move again? I really think not for a couple reasons - 1) the Fall season still happened just about everywhere else. 2) A lot of schools couldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or fans.

I don't really know what the situation is outside of where I am (TX), but with HS football kicking off this week, game cancellations are happening fast and furious due to Covid. 6 on Monday, 11 on Tuesday, up to 21 today. That's a very small percentage overall, but still concerning.

Schools shouldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or no fans. If you don't want to play and/or don't want live attendance then you should just fold your program. I would hope that donors would tell the schools that they won't be supporting them any further.

I agree with that, but it’s the same people in charge that made the wrong decision last time, whether the schools wanted it or not. That’s my concern.

There were no long term consequences to last year's decision though. The schools made less money but not many people stopped donating and I doubt hardly anyone said they would never donate again. If anything quite a few people donated more to help the school weather the storm.

I don't think it will be an issue this season as almost the entire team/conference is vaccinated and that's the narrative that the administrators are working from at the moment. However, if the narrative starts to move to no fans/no games the significant donors need to call Waded (and the other schools' leadership) and tell her there will be consequences this time.

[onceacat]

I pray the answer is no, but is there ANY way that BSC pulls this same move again? I really think not for a couple reasons - 1) the Fall season still happened just about everywhere else. 2) A lot of schools couldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or fans.

I don't really know what the situation is outside of where I am (TX), but with HS football kicking off this week, game cancellations are happening fast and furious due to Covid. 6 on Monday, 11 on Tuesday, up to 21 today. That's a very small percentage overall, but still concerning.

Schools shouldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or no fans. If you don't want to play and/or don't want live attendance then you should just fold your program. I would hope that donors would tell the schools that they won't be supporting them any further.

I agree with that, but it’s the same people in charge that made the wrong decision last time, whether the schools wanted it or not. That’s my concern.

It wasn't a matter or "want" or "don't want". It was a mater of an inability to pay for the testing protocols that the big schools used.

Besides, this year most of the players are going to be vaccinated, so the risk profile is totally different. There is literally 0% chance of the season being cancelled.

[catatac]

I pray the answer is no, but is there ANY way that BSC pulls this same move again? I really think not for a couple reasons - 1) the Fall season still happened just about everywhere else. 2) A lot of schools couldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or fans.

I don't really know what the situation is outside of where I am (TX), but with HS football kicking off this week, game cancellations are happening fast and furious due to Covid. 6 on Monday, 11 on Tuesday, up to 21 today. That's a very small percentage overall, but still concerning.

Schools shouldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or no fans. If you don't want to play and/or don't want live attendance then you should just fold your program. I would hope that donors would tell the schools that they won't be supporting them any further.

I agree with that, but it’s the same people in charge that made the wrong decision last time, whether the schools wanted it or not. That’s my concern.

It wasn't a matter or "want" or "don't want". It was a mater of an inability to pay for the testing protocols that the big schools used.

Besides, this year most of the players are going to be vaccinated, so the risk profile is totally different. There is literally 0% chance of the season being cancelled.

I sure as hell hope so, but since somebody brought up the discussion... does anyone know what the protocol, rules are for this year in terms of positive tests? In other words, if a team gets a few positive tests are they going to have to forfeit? Just because a team is 100% vaccinated doesn't mean they aren't at risk of getting several positive tests.

[ibleedblue]

I pray the answer is no, but is there ANY way that BSC pulls this same move again? I really think not for a couple reasons - 1) the Fall season still happened just about everywhere else. 2) A lot of schools couldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or fans.

I don't really know what the situation is outside of where I am (TX), but with HS football kicking off this week, game cancellations are happening fast and furious due to Covid. 6 on Monday, 11 on Tuesday, up to 21 today. That's a very small percentage overall, but still concerning.

Schools shouldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or no fans. If you don't want to play and/or don't want live attendance then you should just fold your program. I would hope that donors would tell the schools that they won't be supporting them any further.

I agree with that, but it’s the same people in charge that made the wrong decision last time, whether the schools wanted it or not. That’s my concern.

It wasn't a matter or "want" or "don't want". It was a mater of an inability to pay for the testing protocols that the big schools used.

Besides, this year most of the players are going to be vaccinated, so the risk profile is totally different. There is literally 0% chance of the season being cancelled.

I sure as hell hope so, but since somebody brought up the discussion... does anyone know what the protocol, rules are for this year in terms of positive tests? In other words, if a team gets a few positive tests are they going to have to forfeit? Just because a team is 100% vaccinated doesn't mean they aren't at risk of getting several positive tests.

A cancellation in the Big Sky leads to a forfeit this year.

But that’s not to say one positive case on the team could lead to a cancellation and forfeit. My understanding is say a team has an 80% vaccination rate then it sounds like that could leave a lot of players still available to play. I’m not exactly positive how that all works out but I remember hero sports touching on that.

[catatac]

I pray the answer is no, but is there ANY way that BSC pulls this same move again? I really think not for a couple reasons - 1) the Fall season still happened just about everywhere else. 2) A lot of schools couldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or fans.

I don't really know what the situation is outside of where I am (TX), but with HS football kicking off this week, game cancellations are happening fast and furious due to Covid. 6 on Monday, 11 on Tuesday, up to 21 today. That's a very small percentage overall, but still concerning.

Schools shouldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or no fans. If you don't want to play and/or don't want live attendance then you should just fold your program. I would hope that donors would tell the schools that they won't be supporting them any further.

I agree with that, but it’s the same people in charge that made the wrong decision last time, whether the schools wanted it or not. That’s my concern.

It wasn't a matter or "want" or "don't want". It was a mater of an inability to pay for the testing protocols that the big schools used.

Besides, this year most of the players are going to be vaccinated, so the risk profile is totally different. There is literally 0% chance of the season being cancelled.

I sure as hell hope so, but since somebody brought up the discussion... does anyone know what the protocol, rules are for this year in terms of positive tests? In other words, if a team gets a few positive tests are they going to have to forfeit? Just because a team is 100% vaccinated doesn't mean they aren't at risk of getting several positive tests.

A cancellation in the Big Sky leads to a forfeit this year.

But that’s not to say one positive case on the team could lead to a cancellation and forfeit. My understanding is say a team has an 80% vaccination rate then it sounds like that could leave a lot of players still available to play. I’m not exactly positive how that all works out but I remember hero sports touching on that.

I probably didn't phrase my question very well. Regardless of vaccination status, what are the rules in terms of teams being allowed to play games in the event one or more players have recently tested positive? Maybe it does depend on vaccination counts, both in terms of said team and the upcoming opponent... who knows.

Yes, I would assume if a team has to cancel a game due to a Covid outbreak, that would be a forfeit.

[ibleedblue]

I pray the answer is no, but is there ANY way that BSC pulls this same move again? I really think not for a couple reasons - 1) the Fall season still happened just about everywhere else. 2) A lot of schools couldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or fans.

I don't really know what the situation is outside of where I am (TX), but with HS football kicking off this week, game cancellations are happening fast and furious due to Covid. 6 on Monday, 11 on Tuesday, up to 21 today. That's a very small percentage overall, but still concerning.

Schools shouldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or no fans. If you don't want to play and/or don't want live attendance then you should just fold your program. I would hope that donors would tell the schools that they won't be supporting them any further.

I agree with that, but it’s the same people in charge that made the wrong decision last time, whether the schools wanted it or not. That’s my concern.

It wasn't a matter or "want" or "don't want". It was a mater of an inability to pay for the testing protocols that the big schools used.

Besides, this year most of the players are going to be vaccinated, so the risk profile is totally different. There is literally 0% chance of the season being cancelled.

I sure as hell hope so, but since somebody brought up the discussion... does anyone know what the protocol, rules are for this year in terms of positive tests? In other words, if a team gets a few positive tests are they going to have to forfeit? Just because a team is 100% vaccinated doesn't mean they aren't at risk of getting several positive tests.

A cancellation in the Big Sky leads to a forfeit this year.

But that’s not to say one positive case on the team could lead to a cancellation and forfeit. My understanding is say a team has an 80% vaccination rate then it sounds like that could leave a lot of players still available to play. I’m not exactly positive how that all works out but I remember hero sports touching on that.

I probably didn't phrase my question very well. Regardless of vaccination status, what are the rules in terms of teams being allowed to play games in the event one or more players have recently tested positive? Maybe it does depend on vaccination counts, both in terms of said team and the upcoming opponent... who knows.

Yes, I would assume if a team has to cancel a game due to a Covid outbreak, that would be a forfeit.

I’m assuming, since the CDC updated its quarantine guidance stating anyone vaccinated will not have to quarantine, then a team could have some positive cases and still play. I know the health departments in MT are no longer able to require a quarantine for a close contact and the schools this year aren’t going to force quarantine either.

[rollo_tumasi]

This is a stupid thread...

[slccat]

Agreed

[allcat]

I pray the answer is no, but is there ANY way that BSC pulls this same move again? I really think not for a couple reasons - 1) the Fall season still happened just about everywhere else. 2) A lot of schools couldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or fans.

I don't really know what the situation is outside of where I am (TX), but with HS football kicking off this week, game cancellations are happening fast and furious due to Covid. 6 on Monday, 11 on Tuesday, up to 21 today. That's a very small percentage overall, but still concerning.

Schools shouldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or no fans. If you don't want to play and/or don't want live attendance then you should just fold your program. I would hope that donors would tell the schools that they won't be supporting them any further.

I agree with that, but it’s the same people in charge that made the wrong decision last time, whether the schools wanted it or not. That’s my concern.

It wasn't a matter or "want" or "don't want". It was a mater of an inability to pay for the testing protocols that the big schools used.

Besides, this year most of the players are going to be vaccinated, so the risk profile is totally different. There is literally 0% chance of the season being cancelled.

I sure as hell hope so, but since somebody brought up the discussion... does anyone know what the protocol, rules are for this year in terms of positive tests? In other words, if a team gets a few positive tests are they going to have to forfeit? Just because a team is 100% vaccinated doesn't mean they aren't at risk of getting several positive tests.

A cancellation in the Big Sky leads to a forfeit this year.

But that’s not to say one positive case on the team could lead to a cancellation and forfeit. My understanding is say a team has an 80% vaccination rate then it sounds like that could leave a lot of players still available to play. I’m not exactly positive how that all works out but I remember hero sports touching on that.

I probably didn't phrase my question very well. Regardless of vaccination status, what are the rules in terms of teams being allowed to play games in the event one or more players have recently tested positive? Maybe it does depend on vaccination counts, both in terms of said team and the upcoming opponent... who knows.

Yes, I would assume if a team has to cancel a game due to a Covid outbreak, that would be a forfeit.

I’m assuming, since the CDC updated its quarantine guidance stating anyone vaccinated will not have to quarantine, then a team could have some positive cases and still play. I know the health departments in MT are no longer able to require a quarantine for a close contact and the schools this year aren’t going to force quarantine either.

I just had the covid about a month ago. They told me to self isolate for 10 days from the onset of symptoms. I was vaccinated with Pfizer in March.

[ilovethecats]

This is a stupid thread...

It was this time last year too.

Thank god we’re WAY safer now than we were 365 days ago. Looking forward to the season! Can’t wait to see you all again.

If you dare going to the games that is.

[onceacat]

I pray the answer is no, but is there ANY way that BSC pulls this same move again? I really think not for a couple reasons - 1) the Fall season still happened just about everywhere else. 2) A lot of schools couldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or fans.

I don't really know what the situation is outside of where I am (TX), but with HS football kicking off this week, game cancellations are happening fast and furious due to Covid. 6 on Monday, 11 on Tuesday, up to 21 today. That's a very small percentage overall, but still concerning.

Schools shouldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or no fans. If you don't want to play and/or don't want live attendance then you should just fold your program. I would hope that donors would tell the schools that they won't be supporting them any further.

I agree with that, but it’s the same people in charge that made the wrong decision last time, whether the schools wanted it or not. That’s my concern.

It wasn't a matter or "want" or "don't want". It was a mater of an inability to pay for the testing protocols that the big schools used.

Besides, this year most of the players are going to be vaccinated, so the risk profile is totally different. There is literally 0% chance of the season being cancelled.

I sure as hell hope so, but since somebody brought up the discussion... does anyone know what the protocol, rules are for this year in terms of positive tests? In other words, if a team gets a few positive tests are they going to have to forfeit? Just because a team is 100% vaccinated doesn't mean they aren't at risk of getting several positive tests.

A cancellation in the Big Sky leads to a forfeit this year.

But that’s not to say one positive case on the team could lead to a cancellation and forfeit. My understanding is say a team has an 80% vaccination rate then it sounds like that could leave a lot of players still available to play. I’m not exactly positive how that all works out but I remember hero sports touching on that.

I probably didn't phrase my question very well. Regardless of vaccination status, what are the rules in terms of teams being allowed to play games in the event one or more players have recently tested positive? Maybe it does depend on vaccination counts, both in terms of said team and the upcoming opponent... who knows.

Yes, I would assume if a team has to cancel a game due to a Covid outbreak, that would be a forfeit.

Basically, for unvaccinated students, its identical to 2020. A positive test means you miss practice & games. Weekly testing. No makeup games because of positive tests.

For vaccinated student-athletes, it looks like 2019. No weekly testing. No quarantine. No missed games. You only get tested if you come in close contact with an unvaccinated positive test.

All the students from Cali, Washington and Oregon will be 100% vaccinated in order to return to school in the first place.

Its Vigens job to make sure 100% of his players are vaccinated so the Cats don't risk a forfeit.

There is literally 0% chance that the season gets cancelled, but an unvaccinated team could easily end up forfeiting games, losing gate revenues as a result, and potentially miss the playoffs.

Its beyond unforgivable that a coach would leave an unvaccinated player on the team in the current environment.

[BleedingBLue]

I pray the answer is no, but is there ANY way that BSC pulls this same move again? I really think not for a couple reasons - 1) the Fall season still happened just about everywhere else. 2) A lot of schools couldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or fans.

I don't really know what the situation is outside of where I am (TX), but with HS football kicking off this week, game cancellations are happening fast and furious due to Covid. 6 on Monday, 11 on Tuesday, up to 21 today. That's a very small percentage overall, but still concerning.

Schools shouldn't survive a 2nd round of no sports and/or no fans. If you don't want to play and/or don't want live attendance then you should just fold your program. I would hope that donors would tell the schools that they won't be supporting them any further.

I agree with that, but it’s the same people in charge that made the wrong decision last time, whether the schools wanted it or not. That’s my concern.

It wasn't a matter or "want" or "don't want". It was a mater of an inability to pay for the testing protocols that the big schools used.

Besides, this year most of the players are going to be vaccinated, so the risk profile is totally different. There is literally 0% chance of the season being cancelled.

I sure as hell hope so, but since somebody brought up the discussion... does anyone know what the protocol, rules are for this year in terms of positive tests? In other words, if a team gets a few positive tests are they going to have to forfeit? Just because a team is 100% vaccinated doesn't mean they aren't at risk of getting several positive tests.

A cancellation in the Big Sky leads to a forfeit this year.

But that’s not to say one positive case on the team could lead to a cancellation and forfeit. My understanding is say a team has an 80% vaccination rate then it sounds like that could leave a lot of players still available to play. I’m not exactly positive how that all works out but I remember hero sports touching on that.

I probably didn't phrase my question very well. Regardless of vaccination status, what are the rules in terms of teams being allowed to play games in the event one or more players have recently tested positive? Maybe it does depend on vaccination counts, both in terms of said team and the upcoming opponent... who knows.

Yes, I would assume if a team has to cancel a game due to a Covid outbreak, that would be a forfeit.

Basically, for unvaccinated students, its identical to 2020. A positive test means you miss practice & games. Weekly testing. No makeup games because of positive tests.

For vaccinated student-athletes, it looks like 2019. No weekly testing. No quarantine. No missed games. You only get tested if you come in close contact with an unvaccinated positive test.

All the students from Cali, Washington and Oregon will be 100% vaccinated in order to return to school in the first place.

Its Vigens job to make sure 100% of his players are vaccinated so the Cats don't risk a forfeit.

There is literally 0% chance that the season gets cancelled, but an unvaccinated team could easily end up forfeiting games, losing gate revenues as a result, and potentially miss the playoffs.

Its beyond unforgivable that a coach would leave an unvaccinated player on the team in the current environment.

Your last sentence is so amazingly absurd. Imagine the sh*t storm that would ensue if an unvaccinated player was dismissed from the team for that reason. Just wow. We'd be looking for a new head coach again.