Anonymous wrote:There was a thread in the Soccer board that might be interesting. The US Olympic Committee has issued guidelines for returning to the field for many sports. These are not binding on the various sport governing bodies, but they do show a bit of what is being said at the higher levels.

Basically, the restrictions are quite severe and it will be sometime before we see "normal" travel sports again. In some of the quotes (from soccer leaders) they note that Spring and Summer are basically over, and that Fall is likely going to be non-existent. They are prepping to return in Spring 2021. While clubs and coaches and parents are all coming up with plans to get back on the field, the public health authorities and governments controlling parks and schools are not really focusing on this as much as some parents might hope.

Anyway--worth a read even if you don't agree with their conclusions.

https://www.aspenprojectplay.org/coronavirus-and-youth-sports/reports/2020/4/30/how-will-youth-sports-return-to-play-usopc-offers-first-glimpse

This is ludicrous! In almost every instance, players are at greater risk of concussion or getting into a car accident on their way to a tournament than becoming ill with COVID 19 as a result of a soccer game! How on earth has our country come to this. So many athletes are going to lose so much. How can we get our leaders to do the right thing. Stand up to the fear mongering.

Anonymous wrote:There was a thread in the Soccer board that might be interesting. The US Olympic Committee has issued guidelines for returning to the field for many sports. These are not binding on the various sport governing bodies, but they do show a bit of what is being said at the higher levels.

Basically, the restrictions are quite severe and it will be sometime before we see "normal" travel sports again. In some of the quotes (from soccer leaders) they note that Spring and Summer are basically over, and that Fall is likely going to be non-existent. They are prepping to return in Spring 2021. While clubs and coaches and parents are all coming up with plans to get back on the field, the public health authorities and governments controlling parks and schools are not really focusing on this as much as some parents might hope.

Anyway--worth a read even if you don't agree with their conclusions.

https://www.aspenprojectplay.org/coronavirus-and-youth-sports/reports/2020/4/30/how-will-youth-sports-return-to-play-usopc-offers-first-glimpse

Interesting article. Despite our family's very active interest in sports and with 3 kids currently playing D1 (lax and one other sport) and 3 elementary kids playing sports, I have to say that I appreciate the go slow response. It isn't that I don't think the kids will be safe, it is that I worry that the kids will be asymptomatic carriers and that the virus will spread to parents and grandparents because of the close contact in sports and at school. The risk isn't worth the reward to me. Of course, we can field half a team just as a family so getting practice and mini-game time in isn't a worry for us.

There was a thread in the Soccer board that might be interesting. The US Olympic Committee has issued guidelines for returning to the field for many sports. These are not binding on the various sport governing bodies, but they do show a bit of what is being said at the higher levels.

Basically, the restrictions are quite severe and it will be sometime before we see "normal" travel sports again. In some of the quotes (from soccer leaders) they note that Spring and Summer are basically over, and that Fall is likely going to be non-existent. They are prepping to return in Spring 2021. While clubs and coaches and parents are all coming up with plans to get back on the field, the public health authorities and governments controlling parks and schools are not really focusing on this as much as some parents might hope.

Anyway--worth a read even if you don't agree with their conclusions.

https://www.aspenprojectplay.org/coronavirus-and-youth-sports/reports/2020/4/30/how-will-youth-sports-return-to-play-usopc-offers-first-glimpse

The data is also showing his thing has been in our country far longer than first thought. Keep the sick and elderly with local support and under current guidelines, and let the kids have at it. Lacrosse or any other sport that is outside for now; indoors come the Fall.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More and more data showing people should be outside, stay at home orders were ineffective and nursing home and long term care (meaning sick and old) should be focused on.

When will Hogan get his head out and wake up?

Outside is good. Fresh air and sunshine is the ultimate disinfectant. Plus sunlight ups your vitamin D. Kids should be out playing sports this summer. It’s a no brainer.

+1, Lets apply common sense and use data to make educated decisions. Right now data suggests the risk is low to this age group and does not warrant the cancellation of events. If you have loved ones at home that are high risk (older or have underlying health conditions) it may be best to sit out for now. Or have a plan in place to minimize the risks to others when returning from the events. The kids cannot build an immunity to the virus living in bubbles. Last I heard, they are going back to college, high, middle and elementary schools this Fall, so it will be better if more have developed an immunity to the virus by this time. Until data confirms the kids and others who typically attend these events are at high risk of a potentially bad outcome then they need to be on field. And high risk does not mean risk of contracting the virus. Many may contract the virus, but most will show no signs or have complications. This is good in the sense they will build up their immunity, which ultimately helps everyone in the long and will help knock out the virus. If the data ever suggests to take correction action we should do so.

Anonymous wrote:More and more data showing people should be outside, stay at home orders were ineffective and nursing home and long term care (meaning sick and old) should be focused on.

When will Hogan get his head out and wake up?

Outside is good. Fresh air and sunshine is the ultimate disinfectant. Plus sunlight ups your vitamin D. Kids should be out playing sports this summer. It’s a no brainer.

More and more data showing people should be outside, stay at home orders were ineffective and nursing home and long term care (meaning sick and old) should be focused on.

When will Hogan get his head out and wake up?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FL and Vandy have lax?

Girls only - need to offset the size of the football programs

And both are very strong women’s lacrosse programs. Not likely to be gone anytime soon (ever).

Anonymous wrote:FL and Vandy have lax?

Girls only - need to offset the size of the football programs

FL and Vandy have lax?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a pending resolution out to NCAA schools - D1 and D3 - to cancel non-revenue sports in the event of institutional economic concerns, but they have to abide by Title IX. Voting closes end of June, with a decision some time in early July.

On April 27th, tThe NCAA Division I Council rejected the efforts of the leaders of five Division I Conferences (the American Athletic, Mountain West, Mid-American, Sun Belt, and Conference USA conferences) who collectively asked the NCAA for a blanket waiver on behalf of 27 of the 32 NCAA Division I conferences to eliminate its current requirement that a university sponsor a minimum of 16 intercollegiate varsity sports to remain a member of the Football Bowl Subdivision. BUT the NCAA Division I Council Coordination Committee and the Division I Council have agreed continue to review the request and its specific components during their May meetings to be acted on by mid-July for implementation in the 20-21 academic year.

These NCAA leagues do not include the powerhouse lacrosse schools for the most part. The American Athletic being the exception (Florida, Vanderbilt). But still, not a lot of big lax schools in those conferences. Stop the fear mongering.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a pending resolution out to NCAA schools - D1 and D3 - to cancel non-revenue sports in the event of institutional economic concerns, but they have to abide by Title IX. Voting closes end of June, with a decision some time in early July.

On April 27th, tThe NCAA Division I Council rejected the efforts of the leaders of five Division I Conferences (the American Athletic, Mountain West, Mid-American, Sun Belt, and Conference USA conferences) who collectively asked the NCAA for a blanket waiver on behalf of 27 of the 32 NCAA Division I conferences to eliminate its current requirement that a university sponsor a minimum of 16 intercollegiate varsity sports to remain a member of the Football Bowl Subdivision. BUT the NCAA Division I Council Coordination Committee and the Division I Council have agreed continue to review the request and its specific components during their May meetings to be acted on by mid-July for implementation in the 20-21 academic year.

What schools are in these leagues. Never heard of them.

Most of these are public state "directional" schools or small privates, i.e. University Texas at El Paso, Western Kentucky, UNLV, Utah State, Rice, Air Force, Temple, South Florida, Tulane etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a pending resolution out to NCAA schools - D1 and D3 - to cancel non-revenue sports in the event of institutional economic concerns, but they have to abide by Title IX. Voting closes end of June, with a decision some time in early July.

On April 27th, tThe NCAA Division I Council rejected the efforts of the leaders of five Division I Conferences (the American Athletic, Mountain West, Mid-American, Sun Belt, and Conference USA conferences) who collectively asked the NCAA for a blanket waiver on behalf of 27 of the 32 NCAA Division I conferences to eliminate its current requirement that a university sponsor a minimum of 16 intercollegiate varsity sports to remain a member of the Football Bowl Subdivision. BUT the NCAA Division I Council Coordination Committee and the Division I Council have agreed continue to review the request and its specific components during their May meetings to be acted on by mid-July for implementation in the 20-21 academic year.

What schools are in these leagues. Never heard of them.

Has anyone else seen this?

IWLCA IMLCA are both members of this group and I doubt they'd sign on to this effort if they weren't taking this as a serious threat

https://www.savecollegesports.com/

Anonymous wrote:There is a pending resolution out to NCAA schools - D1 and D3 - to cancel non-revenue sports in the event of institutional economic concerns, but they have to abide by Title IX. Voting closes end of June, with a decision some time in early July.

On April 27th, tThe NCAA Division I Council rejected the efforts of the leaders of five Division I Conferences (the American Athletic, Mountain West, Mid-American, Sun Belt, and Conference USA conferences) who collectively asked the NCAA for a blanket waiver on behalf of 27 of the 32 NCAA Division I conferences to eliminate its current requirement that a university sponsor a minimum of 16 intercollegiate varsity sports to remain a member of the Football Bowl Subdivision. BUT the NCAA Division I Council Coordination Committee and the Division I Council have agreed continue to review the request and its specific components during their May meetings to be acted on by mid-July for implementation in the 20-21 academic year.