Post by fmpol on Dec 26, 2020 19:31:32 GMT -8
Before everyone makes the most dire of interpretations of the latest development, let's just think out what has happened.
The positive test could have come from one of two locations, Pullman (where the team received the news on 12/20) or Corvallis. Had the positive occurred within the traveling party in Pullman (as I had previously speculated), in all likelihood so many players and coaches would have unambiguously required the 14-day quarantine that they would have announced immediately after 12/20 that the program was shutting down for two weeks and would require the postponement of the next 3 games. They wouldn't have had to wait 5 days to decide that they needed to postpone UCLA and USC.
The fact that they needed 5 days tells me that the positive was found back in Corvallis and that they then needed to go to the SafeTags tracking data to see who was in contact with the individual. (The positive could very well have been a member of the training, medical, or other support staff who does not travel with the team nor necessarily interact with every player on a regular basis in midseason.) What if just one player was in contact and required quarantine? The team would have probably just continued playing minus the one player. But what if it was more than one player? How many players and coaches would you have to lose before deciding that the entire program just needed to shut down? The fact that this played out over 5 days tells me that the team was still hopeful of continuing but finally decided that the setback was too much (either that or the tracking data was ambiguous and they needed to make the decision based on incomplete data, an unenviable task).
In other words, this situation seems similar to what Utah went through - they had to shut down for two weeks, then get in as much practice as time allowed and then headed off on their road trip. Why wouldn't the Beavs do the same? Only depressed fans would think oh we're losing so much anyway so let's just quit. And before comparing this to Duke, remember their coach had said publicly prior to the shutdown that she didn't think the team should be playing and then ostensibly left it up to the players to make the final decision to quit. Do we have any indication at all that Rueck and the players feel the same because of some losses or because they no longer feel safe? Maybe someone has some inside info that Rueck and/or the players don't want to play any more, but it would surprise me.
FYI: I don't know when a 14-day quarantine period would have begun but even if it began on 12/20, they couldn't wait out 14 days without team practice and then immediately play USC on the 15th day (1/3). But I think they would play the following game on 1/8 at Cal even if it meant only practicing a few days, so that would be the next game on the schedule.
The positive test could have come from one of two locations, Pullman (where the team received the news on 12/20) or Corvallis. Had the positive occurred within the traveling party in Pullman (as I had previously speculated), in all likelihood so many players and coaches would have unambiguously required the 14-day quarantine that they would have announced immediately after 12/20 that the program was shutting down for two weeks and would require the postponement of the next 3 games. They wouldn't have had to wait 5 days to decide that they needed to postpone UCLA and USC.
The fact that they needed 5 days tells me that the positive was found back in Corvallis and that they then needed to go to the SafeTags tracking data to see who was in contact with the individual. (The positive could very well have been a member of the training, medical, or other support staff who does not travel with the team nor necessarily interact with every player on a regular basis in midseason.) What if just one player was in contact and required quarantine? The team would have probably just continued playing minus the one player. But what if it was more than one player? How many players and coaches would you have to lose before deciding that the entire program just needed to shut down? The fact that this played out over 5 days tells me that the team was still hopeful of continuing but finally decided that the setback was too much (either that or the tracking data was ambiguous and they needed to make the decision based on incomplete data, an unenviable task).
In other words, this situation seems similar to what Utah went through - they had to shut down for two weeks, then get in as much practice as time allowed and then headed off on their road trip. Why wouldn't the Beavs do the same? Only depressed fans would think oh we're losing so much anyway so let's just quit. And before comparing this to Duke, remember their coach had said publicly prior to the shutdown that she didn't think the team should be playing and then ostensibly left it up to the players to make the final decision to quit. Do we have any indication at all that Rueck and the players feel the same because of some losses or because they no longer feel safe? Maybe someone has some inside info that Rueck and/or the players don't want to play any more, but it would surprise me.
FYI: I don't know when a 14-day quarantine period would have begun but even if it began on 12/20, they couldn't wait out 14 days without team practice and then immediately play USC on the 15th day (1/3). But I think they would play the following game on 1/8 at Cal even if it meant only practicing a few days, so that would be the next game on the schedule.
