Notre Dame 2020 Class Ranking down to #14

[chaseball]

1. We're talking about where ND ranks right now, relative to other classes. Nobody is making an argument relative to where classes will finish next week. In recruiting it's near impossible to talk definitively about something a week away. We'll re-evaluate a weekend from now.

2. I'm not talking about any best case scenario. I literally proposed a mid case scenario in my last post when I looked at the current class composition and said "let's calculate the class with three 4 star players and three 3 star player, considering the class is essentially comprised of 50% of both.

Are you at least willing to concede to the two things?

1). 5th year, returning senior starters at Notre Dame are likely to be more valuable to a program than 99% of freshman, including most 5 stars? The premise being that they are 22, developed physically and developed within the system they play.

2). Notre Dame's 2020 class average of 0.9075 ranks #8 nationally, ahead of programs such as Florida, Michigan, Penn State, Oklahoma and Oregon, whose classes rank ahead of ND based on numbers taken, rather than quality of talent. Your argument is always that the quality of your players matters above all else. Well you also know then than really only the top 50'ish players on your roster at any given time are relavent. The rest don't play and their contribution to winning is negligible.

Therefore, if Notre Dame simply recruited the top 12'ish players in a 4 year cycle at the rate they did this year, their depth chart (the guys that actually matter) would be more talented the guys at the schools I just listed. That's how Clemson got to the point they are at. They didn't land top 5 classes until after they got over the top. They simply landed / developed 2 elite quarterbacks and landed about 25-30 top 150 players over 3 cycles to surround them. That, along with excellent coaching, was enough to win.

I put together my initial post quickly and then came back and made some heavy edits to be more concise.

I disagree with a lot of this post but it would only be rehashing disagreements we've had on these topics and there's nothing really to say that hasn't been said already.

 

[IrishInOntario]

I put together my initial post quickly and then came back and made some heavy edits to be more concise.

I disagree with a lot of this post but it would only be rehashing disagreements we've had on these topics and there's nothing really to say that hasn't been said already.

Fair enough.

I do find it disingenuous, however, to "pick and choose" what information from the recruiting industry that you personally find to be relevant.

For example, you often talk about the credibility of the people in the industry, in that their jobs depend on relative accuracy. Yet you are skeptical when they directly say something like "X kid told me that he tried to commit to Notre Dame but they told him to wait." OR "X coach in the recruiting department told me that X kid tried to commit to Notre Dame but they didn't have room". Zinter and Murphy are examples of recruits that happened to in the 2020 cycle. So you want me to believe that the accuracy of their rankings is imperative to their credibility, but the information they report is not?... What I'm getting at is this. Do you really think the recruiting reporters and analysts would keep their access if they constantly made up stories / lied about recruits?

Again, I struggle to understand how you find them to be credible in the one aspect of their job that supports your argument, but in the next breathe find them to lack credibility in the other aspect of their job, which in this case, refutes your arguement...

I also find it strange that you routinely talk about the quality of recruits in a class. Then when I point out that Notre Dame's class average is higher than all but 8 teams ahead of them, which directly reflects the quality of talent they are bring in, rather than the quantity of talent, you seem to suddenly find that irrelevant because it doesn't support your narrative.

If you're willing, I'm curious why you've strayed so far from consistancy on this topic?

 

[chaseball]

Fair enough.

I do find it disingenuous, however, to "pick and choose" what information from the recruiting industry that you personally find to be relevant.

For example, you often talk about the credibility of the people in the industry, in that their jobs depend on relative accuracy. Yet you are skeptical when they directly say something like "X kid told me that he tried to commit to Notre Dame but they told him to wait." OR "X coach in the recruiting department told me that X kid tried to commit to Notre Dame but they didn't have room". Zinter and Murphy are examples of recruits that happened to in the 2020 cycle. So you want me to believe that the accuracy of their rankings is imperative to their credibility, but the information they report is not?... What I'm getting at is this. Do you really think the recruiting reporters and analysts would keep their access if they constantly made up stories / lied about recruits?

Again, I struggle to understand how you find them to be credible in the one aspect of their job that supports your argument, but in the next breathe find them to lack credibility in the other aspect of their job, which in this case, refutes your arguement...

I also find it strange that you routinely talk about the quality of recruits in a class. Then when I point out that Notre Dame's class average is higher than all but 8 teams ahead of them, which directly reflects the quality of talent they are bring in, rather than the quantity of talent, you seem to suddenly find that irrelevant because it doesn't support your narrative.

If you're willing, I'm curious why you've strayed so far from consistancy on this topic?

A scouting report/evaluation/etc. is a first hand account of an analyst's opinion of a recruit based on all of the best data they have on a prospect. This is the core of what they are hired to do: scout and provide a nation-wide big board for the public.

A lot of the other type of information that gets passed on to the public via analysts/insiders/media is a lot of speculation/rumor mill fodder and I rarely ever see direct quotes like the example you provided published anywhere reputable.

I also don't take a lot of what coach's or prospects say to the media in general at face value. There's a lot of agenda and PR behind it. If a prospect ultimately chooses another school it's easier to just spin it in a way that doesn't make the other school look bad or upset their fan base "i went to OSU instead of ND because ND was 'full'" is much less confrontational answer than saying "i chose OSU because i liked them better"

etc. etc.

This isn't a great example but I'm using it to convey a much broader point.

As for the higher recruit average I made this point quite a bit in this thread already. When you recruit a smaller class it's easier to be more selective/exclusive in who you recruit and it also frees up the staff's resources to focus in on a lesser quantity of players. Since you only are taking 1 or 2 guys at a position instead of 3 or 4 you can invest more resources into those top 2 guys and you can also sell a small class on the recruiting trail. It means that the school is essentially "all in" on those recruits and recruits like to hear that kind of rhetoric.

Most smaller classes are going to have a higher average rating per recruit. There's an obvious risk/cost that comes with recruiting a smaller class though: if a program doesn't hit on many of the players in their smaller class, they will find themselves 'reaching' for more lesser talented players in a future class for numbers reasons. My guess is that's why you rarely ever see top tier programs wasting any spots on their 85 man roster for low impact stop gap players and why they always have 20+ commits (in most cases).

5th year returning players or grad transfers are great at filling depth/holes but they don't offer anywhere near the potential upside that a raw top 100 prospect does. And since NDs roster is already deep but lacking upside I disagree completely with the strategy of sacrificing numbers in a class for 1 year stop gaps and returning 5th years who are non impact players. But BK is terrible at recruiting/attracting top 100 players so it doesn't surprise me that he's instead having to resort to these type of tactics.

 

[IrishInOntario]

A scouting report/evaluation/etc. is a first hand account of an analyst's opinion of a recruit based on all of the best data they have on a prospect.

A lot of the other type of information that gets passed on to the public is a lot of speculation/rumor mill fodder and I rarely ever see direct quotes like the example you provided published anywhere reputable.

I also don't take a lot of what coach's or prospects say to the media in general at face value. There's a lot of agenda and PR behind it. If a prospect ultimately chooses another school it's easier to just spin it in a way that doesn't make the other school look bad or upset their fan base "i went to OSU instead of ND because ND was 'full'" is much less confrontational then simply saying "i chose OSU because i liked them better"

etc. etc.

This isn't a great example but I'm using them to convey a much broader point.

As for the higher recruit average I touched on this quite extensively already. When you recruit a smaller class it's easier to be more selective/exclusive in who you recruit and it also frees up the staff's resources to focus in on a lesser quantity of players.

I haven't looked at extensively but it's intuitively obvious that most smaller classes are going to have a higher average rating per recruit. But there's an obvious risk/cost that comes with recruiting a smaller class...if a program doesn't hit on many of the players in their smaller class, they can find themselves 'reaching' for more lesser talented players in a future class to prevent depth issues.

5th year returning players or grad transfers are great at filling depth/holes but they don't offer anywhere near the upside of a top 100 player/raw freshmen does. And since NDs roster is already deep but lacking upside I disagree completely with the strategy of sacrificing numbers in a class for 1 year stop gaps and returning 5th years who are non impact players.

Per your last paragraph, I suspected (and was hoping) that you would answer that way...

Tommy Kraemer (#26 comp)
Isaiah Pyror (#63 comp)
Liam Eichenberg (#80 comp)
Shaun Crawford (#112 comp)
Javon McKinley (#114 comp)
Daelin Hayes (#133 comp)

So is your argument that a top 100 (or borderline top 100 recruit) recruit, is less valuable after 4-5 years of development in a system, in which they've earned a starting position, than they are as 18 year old freshman walking in the door?

Because ND is only considering bringing back 2 players (Book and Ogundeji) that weren't top 100 / borderline top 100 recruits in their various classes.

I'm confused as to how / why you can make such a definitive statement?... Is it not true that a lot of guys get 5th years for different reasons? Sometimes because of injuries? Sometimes because of competition ahead of them? Sometimes because they strategize in order to showcase themselves?

I think your speculation that some random, unnamed, top 100 recruit would undoubtedly be better for Notre Dame than a former top 100 recruit who is now a starter and 4-5 years more developed, is silly.

Liam Eichenberg, Tommy Kraemer and Daelin Hayes, at a minimum, are getting drafted into the NFL out of that group at the culmination of the 2020 season should they avoid significant injury... But a theoretical, 18 year old top 100 recruit gives ND a better player than one of those guys?

Come on Chase.

 

[chaseball]

Per your last paragraph, I suspected (and was hoping) that you would answer that way...

Tommy Kraemer (#26 comp)
Isaiah Pyror (#63 comp)
Liam Eichenberg (#80 comp)
Shaun Crawford (#112 comp)
Javon McKinley (#114 comp)
Daelin Hayes (#133 comp)

So is your argument that a top 100 (or borderline top 100 recruit) recruit, is less valuable after 4-5 years of development in a system, in which they've earned a starting position, than they are as 18 year old freshman walking in the door?

Because ND is only considering bringing back 2 players (Book and Ogundeji) that weren't top 100 / borderline top 100 recruits in their various classes.

I'm confused as to how / why you can make such a definitive statement?... Is it not true that a lot of guys get 5th years for different reasons? Sometimes because of injuries? Sometimes because of competition ahead of them? Sometimes because they strategize in order to showcase themselves?

I think your speculation that some random, unnamed, top 100 recruit would undoubtedly be better for Notre Dame than a former top 100 recruit who is now a starter and 4-5 years more developed, is silly.

Liam Eichenberg, Tommy Kraemer and Daelin Hayes, at a minimum, are getting drafted into the NFL out of that group at the culmination of the 2020 season should they avoid significant injury... But a theoretical, 18 year old top 100 recruit gives ND a better player than one of those guys?

Come on Chase.

I did say "non impact players" the last three players you mentioned would of course be impact players. I would even include Ian Book in that group as well especially given the nature of his position.

In the case of everybody else (Ogundeji being a borderline case) I would rather have a composite top 100 prospect who provides more "lotto tickets" (if you will) that might potentially develop into much higher impact long-term players.

But like I said in my edit, BK struggles mightily to recruit top 100 talent so it doesn't surprise me that he's more aggressive on taking grad transfers and 5th year seniors (the opportunity cost of taking stop gap/filler players isn't as high for him than it is for someone like saban as an example).

 

[chaseball]

I did say "non impact players" the last three players you mentioned would of course be impact players. I would even include Ian Book in that group as well especially given the nature of his position.

In the case of everybody else I would rather have a composite top 100 prospect who provides more "lotto tickets" (if you will) that might potentially develop into much higher impact long-term players.

But like I said in my edit, BK struggles mightily to recruit top 100 talent so it doesn't surprise me that he's more aggressive on taking grad transfers and 5th year seniors (the opportunity cost is not as high).

Also to add to this post:

After 1-2 years in the program I put much less weight on the prospect's recruiting rating and put way more weight on the player's production in the program. At the point of a 5th year player I put ZERO weight on their prospect evaluation and put 100% of the weight on their production while in the program.

 

[Golson5]

Don't be surprised at all if Ade Ogendeji gets drafted higher than Hayes and somewhere in the top 4 round

 

[Catholicfan95]

This thread has earned the seal of approval

 

[hvillebill]

Also to add to this post:

After 1-2 years in the program I put much less weight on the prospect's recruiting rating and put way more weight on the player's production in the program. At the point of a 5th year player I put ZERO weight on their prospect evaluation and put 100% of the weight on their production while in the program.

So in other words, you freely admit that all of your ranting and raving about star ratings really doesn’t mean anything after all.

You should take your own advice, Bruh.

 

[zonairish]

Texas signed 17, yet they are in the top 10. Another falsehood perpetuated by the BK apologists.

my question to you who do you trust more Luginbil Farrell or Kelly

 

[chaseball]

So in other words, you freely admit that all of your ranting and raving about star ratings really doesn’t mean anything after all.

You should take your own advice, Bruh.

I look at college football recruits like I do NFL draft picks as an example.

At the major P5 level...

5 star players are 1st rounders
4 star players are middle rounders
3 star players are late rounders

On aggregate there's a direct correlation between your rating as a prospect and what your chances are of performing in an organization/football program. Naturally any organization is going to want as many 1st round picks/5 star players as they possibly can get because these players have the best chance producing the most value for an organization.

But give me the "late round" rookie RB (or 3 star freshman RB) who breaks camp as a starter and produces a 1,000+ yard season over a 1st round rookie RB (or 5 star freshman RB) who struggles to get carries in mop up duty that same year.

It no longer matters what these players respective prospect rating/draft rating was at this point. Their production while in the program tells us way more about their quality.

 

[Bumpdaddy]

I'm updating this thread with pertinent info for posterity's sake. In Monday's 247 podcast, Pete Sampson made the following comments about recruiting class rankings and class size.

In the last 5 years...

• Only one team with 20 or less recruits finished in the top 5 final recruiting rankings
• Only 3 teams with 20 or less recruits finished in the top 10
• 19 out of 25 teams that finished in the top 5 had 25 or more recruits

It's pretty clear that class size matters significantly when it comes to recruiting rankings despite formulas that are supposed to mitigate the effect.

 

[NDIRISH53]

I'm updating this thread with pertinent info for posterity's sake. In Monday's 247 podcast, Pete Sampson made the following comments about recruiting class rankings and class size.

In the last 5 years...

• Only one team with 20 or less recruits finished in the top 5 final recruiting rankings
• Only 3 teams with 20 or less recruits finished in the top 10
• 19 out of 25 teams that finished in the top 5 had 25 or more recruits

It's pretty clear that class size matters significantly when it comes to recruiting rankings despite formulas that are supposed to mitigate the effect.

#sizematters

 

[d1042]

?

if you could get a class with 2 5* DE’s and 3 5* DT’s and the rest 3*’s would you take that class?

 

[4-4-3]

Most of the people who “constantly bitch” have never seen ND be a true powerhouse. I have, you have, many of this board haven’t. My sons are the same way, they just want to see one championship more than anything in the world. I’ve been alive for 3 and vividly remember 2 of them, and even I would kill for one more in my life.

I’ve been alive for 5 of them. Plus another 5 runner-up years. My father, who passed away in 1994, was alive for ALL of ND’s NC’s and runner-up years.

Between 1948 and 1993, ND either won the NC or came in second, every 4.5 years.

In the subsequent 25 years, starting in 1994, ND is ZERO for 25 either winning the NC or finishing second. Little did my father know that ND championship football HAD DIED ALONG WITH HIM.

Maybe we’ll find out if the mystery of the Resurrection is real or just more happy talk. Place me in the doubters’ column.

In the meantime, a few questions:

1) Is ND still on a level playing field with the more dominant programs?

2) If so, how is this manifested?

3) If not, why not?

4) Is ND’s admin COMMITTED to being a top-5 program with legitimate NC aspirations? Which is not the same as saying, “we compete for the NC each year.” That’s marketing the past as opposed to an affirmative declaration in its MISSION STATEMENT, whether in writing or not.

My own answers to these questions are:

1) No. If it were, it would beat these teams at least as often as it loses to them.

2) It’s not manifested as the answer to 1 is no.

3) It doesn’t wish to be.

4) No, but it keeps the brand “fresh,” while not having to run what it perceives as the genuine risk of appearing to be a football factory, when it prefers to be viewed as a Catholic, mid-west version of Harvard or Stanford.

For ND to become a top-5 program would take a complete reset. The right admin attitude, the right coach and the right players. If any of the three ingredients isn’t there, it doesn’t happen. The coach gets the players without admin/scholastic interference and the players then make the coach and vice-versa.

Note that they don’t have these discussions on SEC boards or those of OU, PSU, OSU, etc. Everyone’s on the same page, and no one is worried about challenging Stanford or Harvard, academically.

One of life’s most pernicious lies – especially for any ladies reading this – is that YOU CAN HAVE IT ALL. You can't. Those of you my age know this. The rest of you will find out.

And it's as true for ND or any other institution as it is for individuals. In ND's case, a focus on academics comes at a price, particularly when your football rivals are not similarly impeded.

Which then leaves younger supporters looking for JUST THAT ONE championship as opposed to five in a lifetime. Things are not what they were. That ZERO for 25 is obscene. Like an olive oil stain on a bright silk tie. There’s no overlooking it.

An occasional whiff of glory is NOT a return to it. And ND, the institution, shows no sign of desiring an NC winner or runner-up every 4.5 years, let alone implementing the necessary measures to secure it. There's no such action plan.

This is why I see the whole KELLY/NOT KELLY contretemps as more symptomatic than causative and, hence, subordinate to the real issue, which is not only STRUCTURAL but also -- as long as nothing fundamental changes --IRRESOLVABLE.

No matter how good or bad the next coach is, he will face the same set of issues.

 

[d1042]

Will teams continue to recruit if universities close and the 2020 athletic events are cancelled ?

Some companies are already grounding travel within their national offices, that is, they have a no travel ban. As this gains momentum, we may see other closures (schools and implementation of more work from home) thus, it would seem somewhat irresponsible to then witness gatherings of 50-100,000 at a sporting event.

The mods here may not like mixing socially important news on a football forum, but there are clear implications current events are relevant topics relating to what impact they play on the upcoming seasons.

 

[4-4-3]

Will teams continue to recruit if universities close and the 2020 athletic events are cancelled ?

Some companies are already grounding travel within their national offices, that is, they have a no travel ban. As this gains momentum, we may see other closures (schools and implementation of more work from home) thus, it would seem somewhat irresponsible to then witness gatherings of 50-100,000 at a sporting event.

The mods here may not like mixing socially important news on a football forum, but there are clear implications current events are relevant topics relating to what impact they play on the upcoming seasons.

Well, someone had to break ranks considering that human beings are getting sick in large numbers -- some fatally -- and we all know it.

I've been reading and writing about this extensively. From what I've gathered, it all depends on how long this epidemic lasts. One report pointed to a peak of 500 million infected souls -- worldwide -- by mid-May. That same report forecast a major US recession, not a minor one, and certainly more than a buy-the-dip interlude.

We'll see what happens with baseball season. What sport is more airborne? And what team will want to play in Seattle?

I've been a prepper since the 2008 financial collapse, have a second home in the country and have two years of food, supplements, household supplies and medicines stocked up.

We also have barter-able goods and basic forms of money. And two shotguns.

I'm not saying that the world is coming to an end as the whole thing could be gone by June. But the situation is ripe for unintended consequences like seldom seen before. Plus, the virus could fade with warm weather then come back with a vengeance in the fall as was the case with the Spanish flu.

If I'm not mistaken, ND played about 6 games in 1918, courtesy of that killer flu.

In this context, sports mean very little. I'm trying to keep my family from getting sick or worse.

We live in Manhattan and upstate New York and are right now trying to time our departure from the City to the country.

We prepared for this, and here it is. I'm certain disruptions are ahead.

We have no choice but to take this seriously.

 

[irish4life888]

I understand our limitations when it comes to recruting. But there is no excuse for finishing 23rd. Not looking good imo!

 

[d1042]

Well, someone had to break ranks considering that human beings are getting sick in large numbers -- some fatally -- and we all know it.

I've been reading and writing about this extensively. From what I've gathered, it all depends on how long this epidemic lasts. One report pointed to a peak of 500 million infected souls -- worldwide -- by mid-May. That same report forecast a major US recession, not a minor one, and certainly more than a buy-the-dip interlude.

We'll see what happens with baseball season. What sport is more airborne? And what team will want to play in Seattle?

I've been a prepper since the 2008 financial collapse, have a second home in the country and have two years of food, supplements, household supplies and medicines stocked up.

We also have barter-able goods and basic forms of money. And two shotguns.

I'm not saying that the world is coming to an end as the whole thing could be gone by June. But the situation is ripe for unintended consequences like seldom seen before. Plus, the virus could fade with warm weather then come back with a vengeance in the fall as was the case with the Spanish flu.

If I'm not mistaken, ND played about 6 games in 1918, courtesy of that killer flu.

In this context, sports mean very little. I'm trying to keep my family from getting sick or worse.

We live in Manhattan and upstate New York and are right now trying to time our departure from the City to the country.

We prepared for this, and here it is. I'm certain disruptions are ahead.

We have no choice but to take this seriously.

————————————————————————————-
There are a few knuckleheads on the board who don’t think this is pertinent or take this subject seriously, but ‘we will always have stupid’.

My son-in law works in NYC also, and he said it is tense. Companies are developing works shifts and work at home plans.
My daughter in law works for a large pharma and they have grounded any company related travel.
Some people understand the significance.

I hope you and your family remain safe, and God Bless

Btw: there was an NCAA tourney game played yesterday WITHOUT fans.
California recommended several sporting event (incl. San Jose Sharks game) be cancelled.
Sharks disregarded the rec. and played.

 

[4-4-3]

————————————————————————————-
There are a few knuckleheads on the board who don’t think this is pertinent or take this subject seriously, but ‘we will always have stupid’.

My son-in law works in NYC also, and he said it is tense. Companies are developing works shifts and work at home plans.
My daughter in law works for a large pharma and they have grounded any company related travel.
Some people understand the significance.

I hope you and your family remain safe, and God Bless

Btw: there was an NCAA tourney game played yesterday WITHOUT fans.
California recommended several sporting event (incl. San Jose Sharks game) be cancelled.
Sharks disregarded the rec. and played.

I believe at least on soccer game in Europe has been played in an empty stadium. Possibly more.

Dr. McCarthy. who's and ER physician at one of the New York teaching hospitals and who's the author of that best selling book on Super Bugs, said last week on Bloomberg that we would approach the mid-hundreds in cases in the US by the end of this week and reach into the THOUSANDS by the end of next week.

So far, his prognosis is right on target. And hardly anyone has been tested!

If anyone doesn't think that this virus is going to disrupt sports as long as it keeps spreading, they might want to rethink that. It will disrupt EVERYTHING. As in our BASIC LIVING ARRANGEMENTS.

I know. It's a hard thing to take on board, but it's real.

Thank you for your good wish and my best to you and yours. Just this afternoon, my son's girlfriend's brother is reporting a 103 fever. May just be the flu, and he's young. But, then, let's see if he can actually get a test here in Manhattan or go to an ER without everyone panicking.

I'm talking REAL-TIME here.

What happens when the first athlete comes down with symptoms? If you think about it, how is that not GAME, SET, MATCH? What -- we're going to have baseball with chunks of quarantined players? Or sharing locker rooms and charter air flights? Going into infected locales?

What for?

 

[mirer03]

Blah blah


Im Im dummer for reading this

 

[d1042]

Blah blah


Im Im dummer for reading this

Well - I think that was the case well before you read that!

 

[CBKsFather]

They do this every couple of years, Bird Flu, Swine Flu, Mad Cow Disease, each one going to be an epidemic on a global scale lol. It's propaganda and fear mongering, it's how governments stay in power, how the 1% regulates people like you guys, "the herd".

"Oh no, it has a 5% kill rate!" If you were halfway as in tune as you think, you'd realize the Opioid Epidemic is killing 10x the people, and has been for 10-15 years strong, but it doesn't get the attention because of the negative stigma surrounding it, and people would rather turn their back to it like it doesn't exist.

Wake tf up people.

 

[4-4-3]

They do this every couple of years, Bird Flu, Swine Flu, Mad Cow Disease, each one going to be an epidemic on a global scale lol. It's propaganda and fear mongering, it's how governments stay in power, how the 1% regulates people like you guys, "the herd".

"Oh no, it has a 5% kill rate!" If you were halfway as in tune as you think, you'd realize the Opioid Epidemic is killing 10x the people, and has been for 10-15 years strong, but it doesn't get the attention because of the negative stigma surrounding it, and people would rather turn their back to it like it doesn't exist.

Wake tf up people.

No question that epidemics come and go. Fortunately, the ones you mentioned were contained. This one may be different, and the trajectory of its spread has now surpassed the others.

Crucially, the others never reached pandemic status. This one has. It's everywhere except in a handful of off the grid countries.

See the posts on d1042's thread College Football is several months away . . . .

The WHO, NHI and CDC have all stated that they are not in control of this thing, nor have they a time frame or any firm sense of its projected lethality.

ND, itself, just announced it's bringing home over 100 of its students studying in Italy. Is anyone aware of something like that having occurred before? I've posted the clip on the above referenced thread.

Dr. McCarthy, the epidemiologist who wrote the book on Super Bugs predicted last week that US cases would reach into the hundreds by the end of this week. They have.

He also predicted that they would be in the thousands the following week. I'm tracking this and will post where we top out, assuming you don't see it on the news first.

There's no cure for this. 60% of those who wind up with pneumonia from it die.
And a vaccine is a year to 18 months away.

The good news is that, thus far, children seem only mildly affected, and no one under 30 is known to have died from it. The bad news is that people over 60, particularly those with co-morbidities, are particularly vulnerable.

I'm 71, while my wife -- who's 74 -- just had bacterial pneumonia twice in a 60-day period. We were on a sailing vessel going through the Panama Canal when she contracted it. Sick on a ship is no picnic. And it might have started with this virus.

She spent 4 weeks in the hospital and out recovering and needed plenty of oxygen. So, for some, this virus tends to concentrate the mind a bit more than it might for others, and none of what I've cited is propaganda.

I've reviewed numerous articles and other forms of data on this and have written extensively on it, myself. You're welcome to any of my material. This is more than just a media event.

 

[d1042]

The thing that separates this lil micro-organism is there is currently no vaccine paired with no therapeutics paired with deadly consequences paired with a ‘community spread’!

This ain’t your fathers Oldsmobile!

“we will always have stupid”

perhaps we should be happy to discuss Aaron Banks need to lose 10 pounds!