(Whispers)

"You don’t get to charge more money for things people aren’t interested in just because you want to make more money.

Either build a product people want or lower your prices. People’s hard earned dollars aren’t Julie Cromer’s or OU’s birthright.

Either stop being a mediocre mid-major program or bring down your prices. I’m not paying $120 for my family to watch us play Duquesne. Bleep off with that."




If you don't want to pay those prices at Ohio, don't pay them. Travel to Buffalo to watch the Bulls play Wagner or to Toledo and watch the Rockets face Norfolk State or LIU in 2022. The Redhawks face LIU in Oxford in 2021 or Robert Morris next season. Maybe you would prefer watching the UC Bearcats host Murray State? The fact is that many, many schools have games like you described above. If you don't want to pay the price, stay at home.

Talking to those in the sports industry it's not so much a matter of people wanting to pay this coming season for their respective sports but whether they want to come back. Most of the diehards will but it's the casual or occassional fan who found other things to do this past season who they are afraid won't come back or won't come back as often. Because of that, many season ticket packages have been modified and/or enhanced to attract people back to the games. This is particularly true in cases where supply of seats currently exceeds demand for said seats.

At this point it has little to do with the product on the field. Its the attitude by the athletic department to nickel and dime fans as that is the Athens way.

All were dishonestly told all last year until the very last minute before the season began to buy season tickets anyway even though everyone knew the prospects for an in-person season were next to none. Then after fans bought season tickets they were told you can eat what you paid for this year or defer it to 2021. They called me. I made the election to defer to 2021 then they rudely hung up the phone.

What they should do is open up more tailgate lots like the one across the river from Peden where people parked for free for years a per game tailgate lot then have the season tailgate passes over in the traditional tailgate lot across from the Convo. Tailgating shouldn't be restricted, it should be encouraged as part of the atmosphere.

Same with the green lot they priced it out so high so only a handful of donors want it. They could allow game day parking there for $40 dollars a ticket which could work for high demand games. There are better ways to squeeze money out of a fanbase than refusing to reimburse a $10 dollar ticket fee.

This may be true but there is not a better option. If that's the case we'll just vaccinate people every year like we do with influenza and COVID won't mutate as fast so, hopefully, we can keep up. People do catch if after vaccination but it is uncommon and as far as I know there is still no case of hospitalization. We have a higher percentage of scientifically illiterate people in the USA than most developed countries so we might not quite reach herd immunity. If that's the case we'll be close enough that it will propagate very slowly so those cases of catching it after vaccination should be few and far between and hospitalization of those people should be extremely rare. I think that even if enough people deny vaccination that we don't reach herd immunity that it will be a lesser problem than common year influenza for those of us that do. It does remain to be seen so cross your fingers. At some point you just have to give those that are harmed from refusing vaccination a Darwin Award and allow life to go back to normal.

Truth is we don't know how long the protection from the vaccine lasts -- could be just a few months, might be as long as 18 months. If SARS-CoV-2 acts like the original SAR virus, it could mutate itself out of existence as each mutation was weaker than the one before in terms of lethality. This is the typical route of viral epidemics. There are exceptions, where a virus mutates into a more lethal form -- as happened when the Kansas-Nebraska virus was taken to Spain by U.S. military personnel and came back to the U.S. in 1918 as the "Spanish Flu." No mutation of SARS-CoV-2 so far has been significantly more lethal, though some have been more contagious.

So the odds are that herd immunity via the vaccine and those who have recovered from both symptomatic and asymptomatic injections coupled with downgrading mutations will bring an end to the pandemic in the not too distant future.

Just saw an interesting statistic on the vaccination. So far there are 996 deaths attributed directly to both Covid vaccines. These are deaths as a result of a fatal reaction to the shot itself. This is out of 42 million people vaccinated. That's a death rate of .0023. The seasonal flu vaccine, by comparison, averages about 50 deaths per year, for a death rate of .0000265. Obviously, in both cases, your odds are better getting vaccinated than not getting vaccinated. I should add that the 996 death figure is probably a little higher than it should be because sometimes people die right after receiving a shot, but the shot is not the cause, but the death is included in the total because they can’t prove it wasn’t caused the shot. So the built-in bias is to err on the side of over-reporting rather than under-reporting deaths.

These statistics also show why children 18 and under should not be vaccinated unless they have a known comorbitiy. In this age group they have a greater likelihood of dying from the shot than dying from the disease -- both of which are extremely rare. This, of course, doesn't apply to adults where the odds go the other way. For the record there have been about 600 COVID-19 deaths nationwide in children 18 and under out of cohort of 78 million, and most of those deaths have been children with one or more comorbidities.

Well, that is what Dr. Harvey Risch, an epidemiologist on the Yale faculty, is recommending based on current data. Child-to-adult transmission rates are small compared to adult-to-adult transmission, and adult-to-child transmission is statistically inconsequential because of the very low rates of serious cases in that cohort. You are correct that we don’t yet know the final CDC recommendation and that newer data might change the analysis of relative risk in these situations. As always time will tell.

Can you provide a link with this information? I'm having trouble finding similar numbers on Google.

I think the 996 number you're referring to may be deaths reported, as opposed to deaths directly linked to the vaccine. The data the CDC showed indicates that deaths from anaphylaxis -- which would be deaths as a direct result of the vaccine -- occur at a rate of somewhere between 2 and 5 per million. Even if you assume the high end of that, that'd be more like a rate of 210 deaths per 42 million vaccines administered.

Here's the graph with the CDC data on deaths potentially from the vaccine. This is, of course, U.S. data only.  The major point here is that weighing the relative risk it's much safer on an individual basis to get the vaccine than not get the vaccine.  Further, I expect the death rate after vaccination to go down as younger age cohorts begin to be vaccinated.  So far the vast majority of vaccinations have been in the 65 and older age cohort.  And, keep in mind that these stats are not just from immediate anaphylactic reactions but for anyone who died of natural causes within a few weeks of receiving the shot.  So, some of these deaths were no doubt from other causes, but this is how CDC makes these kinds of calculations.  This chart only shows the reported cases through the VAERS reporting system.  So, the 5 percent death figure here is just of reported cases.  As I said, when you take this number and compare it to the total number of vaccinations the death rate is about .0023 percent not 5 percent.  So as flawed as this system is, the CDC does the same for the seasonal flu shot.  Therefore, we do have a fair A/B comparison. 

In NJ they're doing some "walking back" on the importance of the rate of infection, being 1 or less.

Our infection rate had been rising. Its been hovering at 1 or a little over for about a week.

That hasn't stopped our Governor, who was one of the most "conservative" when it came to lock downs and keeping other restrictions in place, from continuing to loosen his restrictions.

Part of the reason for the increase in the rate of infection is people seem to be getting tested, only when they show symptoms.

That seems to skew the calculation for rate of infection.

Even with the rate of infection over 1,we're continuing to see hospitalizations continue to drop.
Same with covid patients in ICU's or on vents.

The hospital where my wife is a nurse has seen a steady drop in covid
patients.

Covid patients are also, thanks to advances in treatment, not spending a
lot of time in the hospital.
Last year she had very few covid patients to visit at home.

Now her hospital has several hundred.

Most of the patients she visits have been in the hospital for a few days, then go home to complete their recovery.

Most of them had mild symptoms.

Exactly! It’s the same kind of info you’ll see if you look up all the side effects of your prescription medication in the PDR — “reported side effects.” It’s not that they are false, it just that they’re unconfirmed. These are often divided into two groups — those observed during clinical trials and those reported later.

This is totally bogus. These are deaths of people after they took a shot, not caused by the vaccine as you say. The not so fine print says specifically that there has been no deaths attributed to the vaccines based on autopsies,etc. included in their data base. I’m not crazy enough to think that they aren’t unreported deaths directly related to the vaccine, but the total number of deaths after taking the vaccine does not equal the numbers killed by the vaccine. You talk about making stuff up, “deaths from the vaccine” is way off base. Reading comprehension is a lost art I guess.

That’s simply not true, they say in the article that there are no deaths that their data says support any deaths attributable to the vaccine -period,