Quote Originally Posted by Johnson85 View Post
Not sure about that. Mississippi has had 7 fatalities between 18 and 29, out of 5,848 confirmed cases. That works out to about .12% cfr. It's probably pretty safe to cut that in half, so let's say .06% ifr for that age group. Say there are roughly 11,050 FBS scholarship athletes, that'd mean you'd expect about 6.63 deaths acorss all 11,050 athletes. Of course, that's 18-29 year olds, not 18-23 year olds, so maybe 18-23 year olds will have an even lower IFR. That's also Mississippi numbers, and we obviously have a lot of poor and obese people among 18-29 year olds and other health conditions, so it may be that the IFR for healthy 18-23 year olds is more like .00006%. But it seems likely that somebody out of those 11,050 players, even though they are athletes, probably have a significant undetected health issue that puts them at risk, and some of them may seriously struggle. Maybe it's just a true freshman that's really not all that athletic or in good shape, but was freaking huge so a bad team with poor recruiting just took a flyer on him. And that 11,050 is just scholarship athletes, so the total number is presumably a good bit higher.

Not saying we shouldn't have football because of that. We should have football; it's still a very low risk. But I wouldn't want people to be shocked when a football player dies. With big numbres, there are going to be people that die of any number of low probability risks. And those numbers are just for FBS. I'm assuming other divisions will be much less likely to play b/c it's not profitable for them to begin with, but if they play, that will be a lot more than 11,050.
A football player has a bigger chance of dying in a car wreck on the way to practice than dying of COVID. Not having football because of player safety concerns is just completely stupid. There is no other way to spin it. Acceptable risk is a term people need to come to terms with.