Last week, SEC, ACC and Big 12 sports meetings announced their goal of playing football in the fall despite the dangers of Covid-19.While the decisions made through these football meetings were undoubtedly controversial, the rectors of these wonderful schools can still rather protect their selection by arguing that it is consistent with their overall technique of offering online education.
However, earlier in the day, the University of North Carolina announced its goal of moving all undergraduate categories for the rest of the semester to distance education, prompting the immediate spread on the Covid-19 campus almost without delay in the early fall.This U-turn through control of the University of North Carolina seriously undermines the most powerful argument in favor of fall football: the existing fitness pandemic.
According to the University of North Carolina website, the resolution of transferring from online learning to distance learning a week after the fall 2020 semester came after Campus Health Services reported a significant accumulation of positive Covid-19 tests.are remote and 349 are quarantined.
Although there is no data on the covid-19 transmission rate among North Carolina football players today, it can be assumed that Tar Heels football would face an equal, if not greater, threat to contract the virus as all students.In addition to attending classes, UNC school football players are also in physical proximity to education and education.
As discussed in a recent Wisconsin Law Review article titled “College Football at the Time of COVID-19,” there are at least six moderate “benchmarks” that schools should have when deciding whether to offer school football during the existing pandemic.Among them, “schools never deserve to stick to an action course that exposes football players to a greater COVID-19 threat than all students.”This means that “schools that continue to offer many of their online courses during the fall 2020 semester deserve not to schedule live football matches.”
The explanation for why there is so much fear of making sure schools protect the physical well-being of their football players is that schools naturally have a strong monetary incentive to offer a pandemic to school football given the gigantic sums of cash coming from transmission.of elite school football games.In addition, unlike NFL football players, school football players are not represented through a union.As a result, schools would possibly have a greater duty of care to these students.
At the University of North Carolina, Chancellor Kevin M.Guskiewicz and Executive Vice President Robert Blouin will now have to make the difficult resolution of whether the final of the live categories means the early end of the school’s fall 2020 football season.Leaders of other ACC member schools will need to think seriously about whether they need their school’s football players to stop at the University of North Carolina campus to avoid this new coronavirus outbreak.
These will be fun decisions to make. Again, few decisions are fun in the Covid-19 era.
_________________
Marc Edelman ([email protected]) is a professor of law at Baruch College’s Zicklin School of Business and founder of Edelman Law.He is co-author of the Wisconsin Law Review article “College Football in the CoVID-19 Era” and other articles on sports and school law.
I am a professor of law at the Zicklin School of Business (City University of New York), where I studied sports law, antitrust laws, gambling and intellectual property.
I am a professor of law at the Zicklin School of Business (City University of New York), where I studied sports law, antitrust laws, gambling and intellectual property.I also teach the only course in the country on the law of fantasy sports and offer legal recommendations in the industry.