There's no point in responding to him. Trumpers don't care about anything other than what Trump or his Fox News buddies say no matter how big of a lie it is.

There are over 2000 confirmed cases in the US and 48 deaths. Two weeks ago, there were just over 1000 cases in Italy and 29 deaths. As of today, there are over 17000 cases in Italy and over 1200 deaths. Oh, and their health care system is overwhelmed. This is going to get worse because we're not doing enough to stop it.

He's been saying we have it under control for over a month. Feb 26 he said we have 15 cases and within a couple days it will be down close to zero. Oops.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

These charts sure look promising!

I think people are going to panic regardless. People might panic a bit more because of the cancellations, but i don’t think that’s the main reason. Look at the stock markets. Things didn’t start the be cancelled until this week but the market started plummeting on Feb 24. It’s in the interest of safety. Like BlueGoldAg said, the main point of this is to slow the spread. We don’t have a vaccine yet and won’t for a while so that’s not an option. A lot of people are going to get it. The slower it spreads, the better our hospitals can help a higher percentage of people. The quicker it spreads, the higher the likelihood that hospitals will become overwhelmed. If that happens, people won’t just die from the virus but from other stuff also where they can’t get the necessary treatment quick enough.

Ah, a Trumper. That puts the stupidity of your previous post in perspective. Regurgitating BS straight from the idiot-in-chief's twitter feed. Maybe get your news from somewhere other than Fox News or Breitbart and you'll have a better grasp on the situation.

Well for one, we don't know how bad this is going to get. Read the article you posted about the health care system in Italy. We have a finite number of hospitals and beds. What restricting people does is to help lower the number of cases at one time so doctors can adequately help people who get sick.

Not to mention the fact that there isn't widespread testing so we don't know who has it and who doesn't.

This is going to get much worse before it gets better.

I hesitate to put too much stock in 2017's results because it was Hawkins's first year in charge and the team was coming off three years where they went a combined 7-26. So 5-6 was a step forward. It always takes a couple years for a college coach to get his recruits in and get the players used to his system. Years 3 and 4 are the big ones because you've had enough time to mold the program the way you want to. FWIW, I'd do the same even if the results were good. Helfrich went 11-2 and 13-2 at Oregon his first two seasons including a national title game appearance but when Kelly's recruits left, results went downhill quickly (9-4, 4-8 and fired after year 4). So it goes both ways.

I hope I didn't come across as hand waving off this season's results as meaningless because of the schedule and losing Doss. The team took a big step back. They had one blowout (Lehigh). I guess you can count Southern Utah since we were up big going into the 4th but Poly and Portland were close in the 4th. Regardless of the schedule, they were worse next year.

Next year's schedule won't be easy but it doesn't appear to be the gauntlet this year was. Two FBS games, at Weber, home to EWU and Sac. But that's life in the Big Sky. You're going to have at least one FBS game and a couple tough league games. It's not an excuse. But it also affords some leeway when competing for the playoffs. 7-5 probably gets them in. I think that should be the expectation next year, even with a new QB. Like Dr Mike said, you don't win 10 games with subpar coaching. You also don't go in to the Fargo Dome and give NDSU a game without some talent and at least decent coaching.

Next year is a big year. 7 or 8 wins and a playoff berth and we're good. Another 5 win season and the seat starts getting a little warm.

I mean, Hawkins is kind of right.

Of the 6 FCS losses, they were to the teams ranked 1, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 27. They were blown out by Montana and lost handily to Weber. So they didn't lose to a bad team and they play in a tough conference. A big difference between the last two years is the schedule. Last year, the only ranked teams we played in the regular season were EWU and San Diego. This year we not only had 5 but we had five of the top 8. That's rough. Now, the counterpoint to that is to look at what we did against the non ranked teams. The only team we didn't hammer was Idaho State. This year the wins were closer. But lets say they pull out the North Dakota game and either Montana St. At 7-5 they probably get in. So while I'm not going to argue this wasn't a disappointing year, they weren't far off from having a decent year with another playoff berth.

Offensively, not that we needed reminding how much of a stud he was, but the loss of a guy in Doss who was good enough to make an NFL roster is massive for an FCS team. Last year he had 118 catches and 1334 yards. Our top two receivers this year had 99 catches for 1319 yards combined. That's a guy that can make an offense look a hell of a lot better than it might actually be.

I guess I think last year we overperformed a bit thanks to a stud WR, got a bit lucky with the schedule and ended up having a great year. This year, with a tougher schedule and losing said stud WR, I think expectations might have been a bit too high coming into the year, all things considered. If last year's team played this year's schedule, they probably finish worse than 9-2 in the regular season. If this year's team played last year's schedule, they probably finish better than 5-7 and probably make the playoffs. That's the way things work out sometimes.

I don't follow recruiting at all but hopefully last year's run gave us a bump in that department and we've got some good young players coming in that just need a little time. We'll find out in the next two years whether last year or this year was the fluke season and whether or not Hawkins can build something sustainable here.

Not a great sign when we’re only beating a 1-7 team by 8. I know this was on the road and I know it was 33-7, but last years Aggies would have put up 50.

Going for it on 4th and 2 on our own 35? Does Hawkins think we’re losing?

And then throwing it 30 yards downfield. Not a fan of that all around.

You can’t get a false start and a delay of game penalty there. You just can’t.

Might have missed the FG anyway, but there’s a big difference brtweem 3rd and 3 and 3rd and 8. Might have been able to get closer.

And then to take the kick away from your kicker because you don’t snap the ball in time and nobody on the staff sees the play clock winding down? Terrible all around.

If we're going strictly by RPI (which is not a perfect metric), UCD would get a 14 seed, since there were 10 teams worse than them. Is there much of a difference between a 14 and a 15? Not really since no 14 or 15 seed has ever won a game in the women's tournament.

They like to prioritize travel in the women's game. That's why they have the top-4 seeds playing at home. Looks like this year the one exception is South Carolina which has to travel all the way to North Carolina to play. Women's hoops doesn't make the money the men's game does so they try to prioritize ticket sales and limiting the travel.

I mean, I guess it would be cool for the women to get to travel to somewhere other than Stanford to play a game. Could they have swapped us with New Mexico State - a 14 seed in our region and sent us to Ames, Iowa? I suppose. NMSt has to take a flight regardless but now you're spending more money to send UCD on a flight also.

But it's not like being dropped 1 seed line based on RPI is that big of a deal. It's not like any of us have watched one second of any of the women's tournament teams outside of the handful of top teams so there's no eye test here. Looks like there were at least 6 teams who got screwed way worse than we did (seeded below at least 3 teams with worse RPIs in their own region).

I'd normally trust 538 more than RPI, but it seems fishy that we're rated slightly lower than BYU but would be 59-41 favorite if we played them and a decent amount lower than Auburn but would be 55-45 favorites. I can't imagine any perceived home court advantage from playing 2 hours away (if it's even factored in) would matter that much.

Like with the men's team a couple years ago, just happy they won the tournament and got in, even if they're likely to lose by 30.

Did the hard part in coming back from 17 down. Just need to finish it now.

Could have used that follow up at the end of the quarter which would have made it 4 but I'll take them only being down 6 considering it was 17 earlier in the quarter.

Good start to the half. Hopefully a sign of things to come.

Davis laying an egg in the conference tournament? Haven't seen this story before. Hopefully they turn it around in the second.

Missing a lot of shots right now. Seem to be getting decent looks more times than not, just missing.

Four or five straight stops so hopefully that can jump start the team.

Mixed feelings here.

On one hand, all I really wanted before the bracket was announced was to get a home game and win it, whether that was in the first round or as a seed. Anything else was gravy.

On the other hand, getting so close and then losing really hurts. As much as we’d like to think being in the playoffs and making a decent run will be the new normal - and it very well could be - you never know when you’re going to be a minute from making the national semifinals again, and hosting that game as well.

Well that hurts. That hurts a lot.

He needed to throw both of those away.

Need to get to midfield to have a chance at a Hail Mary.

Well that should do it. Not getting a sack or a short gain on the first play was a killer.