[ARETE] Sport and Society College Football and the Pandemic

[richard crepeau]

SPORT AND SOCIETY FOR ARETE
September 23, 2020

It has been several weeks since I last wrote a column. A combination of the Corona virus lockdown and then a retreat to the mountains of North Carolina to escape the Florida heat led to a break from writing. When the Corona virus lockdown began, it looked as if there would be little to write about in the world of sport. Then, a few weeks ago, the sports scene exploded. I was unsure how to ease back into this column. My choice is to look at one issue rather than trying to go back over every development of the last ten weeks.
The decision by the Big Ten to reverse its decision on playing football, which led the Pac-12 to do the same, embodies many elements within our current state of sport, society, and institutions of higher learning. Politics, economics, and our obsession with football have come together to create a volatile mix of forces.
Back in the early spring at the beginning of the crisis there seemed to be some clarity and consensus. In mid-April, several university presidents including Mark Schlissel of the University of Michigan said that if there was no on-campus instruction there would be no football. The NCAA president Mark Emmert stated unequivocally that if there were no students on campus there would be no football. This seemed like a simple and reasonable position.
Any consensus that existed broke down almost immediately. In early May, the Commissioner of the Big 12 indicated that if students were enrolled in remote classes that would be enough to have football. There were reports that many conference commissioners agreed with the Big 12 leader. At this point, no conference had cancelled the football season.
The debate continued through May and June with some suggesting that football and fall sports could be postponed until the spring, a view not popular among many of the nation’s high- profile football coaches. The next major development came in early July when the Ivy League moved all fall sports to the spring. Then, the Big Ten announced that football would be limited to conference games only, and the Pac-12 followed that lead. Most other conferences followed as scheduling vacancies grew.
As limitations were increasing, it became apparent to many that revenues from sports were going to drop. With that in mind, a number of universities cut minor sports from their programs. The most dramatic of these cuts came when Stanford announced that it was cutting eleven of its minor sports at the end of the 2020-21 season. Across the South the SEC, ACC, and Big 12 were not similarly moved.
Then came something few anticipated. A group of athletes from ten Pac-12 schools announced the formation of an organization that was threatening to opt-out of athletics, citing a lack of transparency about health risks, inadequate safety measures, and a lack of enforcement of rules. They were concerned that those making policy were more concerned with dollars than player safety. Big Ten athletes formed a similar organization. The organizing of athletes was not welcomed by administrators and coaches and its long-term impact should be interesting to watch.
On the 11th of August, both the Big Ten and Pac-12 postponed their football season. In a letter explaining the Big Ten decision, the Commissioner, Kevin Warren, cited medical issues and the safety of the athletes as the primary reasons. He also said that financial concerns did not play a role in the process. Players, coaches, and parents were vocal in their opposition to the decision, and petitions and public pronouncements came in waves.
The ACC, SEC, and Big 12 did not follow the Big Ten and Pac-12.  What followed was a month-long round of argument and debate, and at times, near hysteria, involving administrators, coaches, players, parents, students, and politicians. Long gone was the notion that you needed students on campus to have a football season. At times is seemed like football was being claimed as a constitutional right. Under these pressures, the Big Ten Commissioner issued a public letter saying the decision not to play “would not be revisited.”
Then, as football returned to the field and games were being played, the pressure on the Big Ten increased. The decision was “revisited,” and, on September 16, the Big Ten reversed course, explaining once again that the decision was based on medical advice. This was difficult to accept. More likely, the decision was based on pressures from within and without the Big Ten community and the spectacle of the ACC, SEC, and Big 12 playing games and collecting substantial television revenues in the process.
The Big Ten Commissioner said the new testing procedures and the addressing of concerns over heart issues connected to Covid-19, as well as, a series of new protocols had changed the equation from the previous month. The Pac-12 is expected to vote on the return of football sometime this week.
In the meantime, universities across the land continue to reduce or close in-person classes while Covid numbers on campuses continue to rise. If it is not safe to have students in classes on campus, how can it be safe to have football players on campus and in a full contact sport? This question is not being addressed. In communities that are home to Big Ten schools, local public health officials wonder what the impact of the restart of football might be in the larger community. It should be remembered that the opposite of an "NBA bubble,” is a college campus.
In the past week, two universities have moved to online courses to try to deal with a Covid outbreak. The University of Memphis cancelled a football game and SUNY Brockport suspended its men’s soccer team. The University of Notre Dame has postponed its football game with Wake Forest after seven players tested positive and many others were put in quarantine. Several other games have been rescheduled and practices have been curtailed, while students were sent home. Is this a trend?
No one knows how this will play out, but the decision to play football has been deemed worth the risks. The “need” for college football has overwhelmed the science, to the surprise of few.
The hope is that the critics of the decision to play football will be wrong, because if they are right the consequences could be dire. What we do know from all of this is that college football is, as it has been for decades, the most important activity on the American college campus. To paraphrase Al McGuire, everything else is French pastry.
Be careful what you wish for.
On Sport and Society this is Dick Crepeau reminding you that you don’t have to be a good sport to be a bad loser.

Copyright 2010 by Richard C. Crepeau



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ku.edu/pipermail/sport_literature_association/attachments/20200923/530b4a06/attachment.html>