Pundits across all right-wing media did the same. Turner Point USA founder Charlie Kirk called the Big Ten’s decision “disgusting and pathetic”, and college football numbers that appeared on Fox News urged universities not to take to Covid-driven cowardice. “When they stormed Normandy, they knew there were casualties,” Hall of Fame coach Lou Holtz said sei Tuesday.
From the White House pop stage, press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said Trump was trying to protect the dreams of college athletes who “work their whole lives for the moment.” Trump himself called a Fox radio show on Tuesday, asking rhetoric host Clay Travis: Since informed college players are unlikely to die if they contract Covid-19, why are they not allowed to play?
“These footballers are physically very young, strong people, so they will have no problem,” he said.
While older Americans and those with underlying health conditions are more likely to die from Covid-19, the disease infects people of all ages, and can cause serious cases and potentially long-term conditions in people of all ages.
Indeed, there are various scientific and medical arguments against playing college football. There is a need to reverse the recent rise in cases, such as the reality that several states with popular teams are currently experiencing some of the worst outbreaks in the country. There is also emerging research that shows that a high percentage of patients who develop Covid-19 develop myocarditis – a heart condition that increases their risk exponentially for sudden heartbeat. Several college players who had Covid-19, symptomatic or not, are now reporting that they have myocarditis.
And the action of football – a sport that often involves contact – could spread coronavirus, Drs. Anthony Fauci, the expert on top infectious disease, told NBC Sports back in May.
“If there’s an infected footballer on the pitch – a middle linebacker, an approach, whoever it is – as soon as they hit the next man, chances are they’ll spread virus all over the person. , “he said.
But the political gains of protecting a favorite sport – especially one that is at the cultural, economic and political heart of many states – are also powerful, said Ryan Bender, an associate professor of finance at the University of Indiana , who has published numerous articles on the socio-economics of college football.
“When you look at how popular college football is, there are some states that are putting politics on the bubble,” Bender said. “For example, where college football is popular – Iowa, Ohio, Wisconsin, Florida, Michigan, West Virginia, maybe Pennsylvania – sometimes they turn red, sometimes they go blue in the presidential election, and they’re all relevant to college football.”
Walsh added that contrary to questions about re-establishing other elements of American life – can children go back to school? Can we hold personal elections? – Republicans have more “wiggle room” to take a stand on college football.
“In general, most swinging voters are still against it [to schools fully reopening, because] we have to do the schooling well, ”said Walsh, referring to numerous interviews that to show discomfort with school community. “But I think of the college football thing, I think it’s a better political issue for Trump and his people.”
Interestingly, Bender added, the economic fallout from the cancellation of college sports – the lost revenue that local college towns normally expect to record well-attended games in several seasons – seems to be the last thing in the discussion about the future of college football.
“Many small businesses in those small college towns – think Athens, Ga., Tuscaloosa, Ala., Tallahassee, Fla. – there are many owners who will suffer,” he said, referring to the universities of Georgia , Alabama and Florida. “This is analogous to their holiday season, if you will.”
