When the Pac-12 announced on Tuesday it would not play football this fall, the conference supported its decision by releasing a 12-page document laying out all the evidence that led its team of medical experts to that decision. Agree or disagree with their conclusion, at least they showed their work.
Contrast that with the Big Ten, who beat the Pac-12 to the punch by a couple hours. Four days later, the conference still has not shown its work. A decision that affects thousands of peoples livelihoods and a sense of normalcy for millions more, and the Big Ten has not explained -- fully, in detail -- why.
The closest thing the conference has come to explaining its decision is a series of off-the-record conversations for this piece in The Athletic:
Ultimately, the decision came down to what they didn’t know but would be liable for when it came to a virus that doctors and scientists are still learning about on a weekly basis, and emerging data about how it can affect otherwise healthy young adults. Administrators within the Big Ten and across all of college athletics have become alarmed at recent reports on the rare heart condition myocarditis and its appearance in some people who have tested positive for COVID-19. According to a high-ranking Big Ten source, the conference is aware of at least 10 players who have myocarditis.
Keeping that research to itself leads to one of two conclusions about the conference, neither of them good:
1) Either the conference is playing coy with potentially life-saving or life-altering evidence for the thousands of professional, college, high school and youth athletes that will compete this fall, or
2) The conference is afraid the medical community and/or
Is it any wonder, then, why many important factions inside Big Ten country went into open rebellion afterward? Nebraska and Ohio State mused about playing their own rogue seasons.
We all saw Monday how many athletes and coaches argued for a seat at the table through the #WeWantToPlay campaign, and now three different groups of parents are lobbying the conference office to reverse the decision.
The Football Parents Association of Ohio State on Saturday published a letter to commissioner Kevin Warren that cuts to the core of the anger of football families across the Big Ten: "Football is a game of risk. Our sons work extremely hard for the opportunity to play and fully understand the risks involved when they step on the field. Their personal decisions should be acknowledged and honored to give them the opportunity to compete as athletes in the game they love."
The group asks Warren for six things:
-- To reinstate the schedule released Aug. 5, or a "detailed plan for an alternate season."
-- "Full transparency" for coaches, players and parents that led to Tuesday's decision. The group also asks for a meeting with coaches, players and parents.
-- A Zoom call between Warren and senior football players, along with their parents.
-- Allow teams who want to play the opportunity to do so.
-- A detailed plan of safety protocols for all teams.
-- A response by Wednesday.
This is now the third fourth such effort across the 14-team league. Iowa parents made a similar push on Friday, and Nebraska parents have organized as well.
As Sports Illustratedreported in this story, Penn State parents also drafted a letter to the conference office.“The decision just came too quick,” said Dianne Freiermuth, mother of Nittany Lions tight end Pat Freiermuth and president of Penn State's parents association. “I totally believe in medical experts and think we should be listening to them—if the right thing to do medically is not to play, I’m fine with that. But to go from releasing the schedule to the start of practice to stopping the season, without explanation, is just wrong.”
At this stage in the game, parents forcing a reversal of university presidents' decision is about as likely as the coronavirus disappearing with the next full moon.
It's also reasonable for a third-party to view the risks of playing with the coronavirus as unacceptable when piled on top of the standard risks of a football season.
But when an organizing body is making a decision for the people taking on those risks -- a decision that is purportedly in their own best interests but one that goes against their own stated desires -- that body owes it to those people to look them in the eye and tell them why.