If what Davie says is true about the change in process, it would be an unbelievable hose job by the NCAA. If a 2nd test was mandated as part of a change...fine, do it for safety. But 100% no way, can you move forward w/o allowing the ample time for testing for the change you implemented.

I'm just shocked more real info has not come out. Someone in the Pack camp has to know....and if we were truly wronged, can't believe a leak hasn't come forward. UNLESS, Avent and others associated with the program just feel it would be too much of a distraction.

Daviewolf83 said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

wilmwolf80 said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

wilmwolf80 said:

---

It is my understanding, admittedly based on second hand information, that everyone that was at the ballpark original today (ie everyone but Jarrett and Justice) had tested negative yesterday. When and why they were required to be tested again today, I defer to experts on NCAA policy, but the results of those tests were not available by the time the NCAA wanted to start the game. Ultimately, focusing on they minutiae of how and why we were at this point does nothing. Arguing about this or that needs to stop. Whomever is wearing an NC State jersey tomorrow deserves our untethered support.

---

I get what you are saying, but when your HC says, I don't know what even happened....thats more than "minutiae". That's pretty significant. And of course, it doesn't to be him that knows how it all works...he has a job; but for someone to be that surprised and then not able to explain it either means we have a big failure of preparation, the NCAA failed terribly in its role to create an equitable environment, or both.

By tomorrow game time, your last sentence will be 100% true -- in fact, I'd imagine few teams will have ever garnered as much fan backing "per capita" as our baseball team will tomorrow as a result of today's scenario (and then gutty effort)

---

I think it was pretty clear to most people that Avent didn't want to talk about the specifics of the covid testing or vaccines, and parsing his words to try to come up with something more meaningful is pointless. I don't expect the coach to know the minutae of the NCAAs testing and covid protocols. Per the post above yours the NCAA has known about this since Monday. The last minute testing today, who knows who that is on.

---

That was exactly my point -- the minutiae is absolutely an issue, because somethign just doesn't make sense at all.
Now...for Avent, he 100% absolutely has a job to do to get the team ready tomorrow, and I'd much prefer him to do that than gripe about all this stuff -- as we see in the big dance every eyar, the coaches who get caught up in the external stuff, tend to lose quickly. So, let the stuff fall on him (his comment to avoid declaring if he was vaccinated or not), instead of the team.

But the whole idea --- if Jarrett really did test on Monday, for the current team members not to be tested in time to be cleared, would be a complete vacation of the duties of the NCAA. IF, that is what happened.

---

Reportedly, all unvaccinated players were tested yesterday and were negative. This is why they proceeded to the stadium today to play the game. If day of game testing was required, it should have been made known to the team early this morning, so results would be made available prior to the game being played.

---

Was replying to your earlier post when you did this . If your theory is correct, I'm not sure how Boo or anyone else in an official capacity doesn't blow a gasket.

PossumJenkins said:

---

aqasaw234 said:

---

DrummerboyWolf said:

---

aqasaw234 said:

---

DrummerboyWolf said:

---

aqasaw234 said:

---

wilmwolf80 said:

---

Is every player on Vanderbilt vaccinated?

If the answer is no, then they should be subject to the same testing protocols, as they played all entire game against Jarrett this week.

If they aren't being held to this standard, then everything else that has been said is bull*****

And if they are all vaccinated, there is virtually zero risk playing against our players, regardless of test results.

Are we following science and logic, or are we giving an advantage to the biggest draw left in the tournament. Let's be honest.

Pack fans, websites, blogs, podcasts, etc should stop looking for reasons to attack pack players, and unite on this front.

---

you have to be able to look at this whole thing objectively. if everyone on the team is vaccinated, we're not in this mess. what do coaches always preach? control what you can control. well, this is something we could've controlled.

did the ncaa grossly mishandle this? maybe, but we left the door open for them to screw us like this. maybe "blame" isn't the right word, but some of this is definitely on us.

---

The players controlled whether they took the vaccine or not. Not anybody else's business. It's not up to the NCAA to dictate that teams or players be vaccinated.

---

how is it not up to them when it's their tournament?

---

Last I looked, we are still a free country. It's not in their purview to tell people what they can and cannot do especially concerning that person's health. They allow transgender males to compete against females, but because somebody is not vaccinated then it' Oh you can't play. The NCAA makes the rules as they go along.

---

and we willing and freely chose to be a part of the ncaa. we don't have to like their rules, but as long as we want to be a part of ncaa competition, we have to abide by their decisions. if it wasn't up to them, we would've blown them off and played with a full roster today. it's their tournament, so it's their call on covid protocol (fair or not). the fact remains we had the ability to take this decision out of their hands.

---

Actually no. We don't willing and freely choose, which is why the Supreme Court finally struck the first blow last week to the corrupt and inept monopoly of an organization which will hopefully begin its downfall.

---

we didn't make a choice to be a part of the acc and the ncaa? someone forced out hand? someone held a gun to our head?

they are corrupt and it is the beginning of the end for them, but that doesn't change the facts about the situation we find ourselves in right now. again, we don't have to think it's right/fair/moral/etc, but it's their kingdom.

this isn't an apples to apples comparison with what happens with the supreme court decision.

Daviewolf83 said:

---

wilmwolf80 said:

---

Daviewolf83 said:

---

wilmwolf80 said:

---

James Henderson said:

---

wilmwolf80 said:

---

Is every player on Vanderbilt vaccinated?

If the answer is no, then they should be subject to the same testing protocols, as they played all entire game against Jarrett this week.

If they aren't being held to this standard, then everything else that has been said is bull*****

And if they are all vaccinated, there is virtually zero risk playing against our players, regardless of test results.

Are we following science and logic, or are we giving an advantage to the biggest draw left in the tournament. Let's be honest.

Pack fans, websites, blogs, podcasts, etc should stop looking for reasons to attack pack players, and unite on this front.

---

I'd imagine there are contact tracing rules relative to Vandy players and Jarrett.

Who came in contact with Jarrett enough via the contact rules (is it still 6 feet for 10 minutes)?

Again, I don't see why NC State's baseball staff/administration, who know all the details, would allow the biggest draw left in the tourney to get an advantage.

---

What alternative did they have? The only other option was forfeit as far as I can tell. Do you think they could have refused to play the game until the test results came back? It's clear, to me, that the only options were to play with the available dudes or forfeit. The team did the only thing they could do.

---

If the NCAA could not complete the mandatory testing in time for the game to be played, the game should have been delayed. It is up to the NCAA to conduct the tests and do wo in a timely manner. Not doing so, put State at a disadvantage. We can argue all day about it being State's players fault for not being vaccinated, but in the end, the NCAA put in place a requirement to test unvaccinated players and they (the NCAA) were unable to do so in a timeframe that allowed State to play the players.

From what I have gathered from Twitter and other reports I have read tonight, this is what I believe could have happened.

1. JT Jarrett was tested as part of normal protocol for the testing of unvaccinated players and yesterday was found to be positive for Covid-19.
2. Evan Justice was put in contact trace quarantine (likely also yesterday) and is likely not going to be available to play. Typically, players in contact trace quarantine are not tested after being placed in quarantine. They must remain in quarantine for a set number of days (seven days based on the last time my son went through it) and if not symptomatic over this period, they are allowed to leave quarantine.
3. The unvaccinated players on State's team were tested yesterday and all remaining players were found to be negative for Covid-19.
4. Today, the team members and staff that are vaccinated and those who are unvaccinated and received a negative test yesterday went to the stadium today to play the game.
5. After arriving, the NCAA decided another test of the unvaccinated players was required. This is likely what Elliot meant by the rules being changed. The way it worked during the football season last year is as follows. Players are tested the day before a game (within 24 hours) and all of those receiving a negative test are eligible to play the next day. I assume this is the protocol for the CWS and I am not sure why they would consider testing day of game, given the length of time it takes to complete a PCR test.
6. I am not sure what triggered a day-of-game testing requirement, when State's coaches and staff believed they were eligible to play, having secured negative tests within 24 hours of the game. Some have speculated that Vandy's coach may have requested the additional test, but we do not know this for certain. It does appear something in the protocol changed from what State's coaches and staff expected.
7. Once the decision was made to change the protocol and administer a new round of testing for the unvaccinated players, the NCAA should have made the decision to delay the game until all of the new tests could be completed. It is not NC State's fault if the NCAA could not complete the tests and get results in time for the game. If a testing protocol was changed, it was up to the NCAA to insure State was not put at a disadvantage.

Hopefully, we will get further information tomorrow. I do believe the NCAA made a bad decision to play the game before the testing was completed - especially if thprovideged or modified the testing protocol.

---

" do believe the NCAA made a bad decision to play the game before the testing was completed - especially if they changed or modified the testing protocol. "

This is what I believe to be the crux of the issue. The NCAA did not want the possibility of tonight's game being delayed until tomorrow, and I believe this fact led them to not provide adequate time for the results today. I don't believe that NC State had any recourse to stop that from happening, which is why played short handled today.

---

Agree. The NCAA, not NC State is responsible for the testing and doing said testing in time to insure team's can participate. State is likely not the only team with unvaccinated players and regardless if the team has players who test positive, the testing protocols remain the same. Unvaccinated players get tested the day before the game and if negative, they are eligible to play. These are the exact rules my son went through all last Fall for football. This is why coaches sweated the results that usually arrived the morning before the game. The fact State has unvaccinated players is not the issue - the issue is the NCAA does not have the testing capacity to insure players can be tested with adequate time that allows Covid-negative players to participate.

---

You know, if it were any other American organization, you'd just think, "nahh, Davie is just being paranoid...no way this group would have screwed one of its constituent's that way", when time was available to wait.
But, the NCAA has a habit of screwing the little guy.

aqasaw234 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

So to be clear, a public school should mandate that all of their players be vaccinated for the coronavirus to play in the NCAAT? The NCAA doesn't even do that. All of the "leaks" we have so far is that everyone tested negative except Jarrett, and maybe Justice. But everyone else should be vaccinated even though they tested negative for the virus. So just accept that they were held out because we as a State university that cannot make our players get vaccinated didn't. Nonsense. We got jobbed.

Edit to add. And half the team already tested positive for the virus earlier in the season so theoretically have antibodies. Nonsense.

---

no, it definitely shouldn't have been mandated by the university or the state. but the coaching staff and the athletic department should've made it clear to the athletes that something like this could potentially happen if they're not vaccinated. the choice is yours, but if you're not vaccinated, we're rolling the dice.

we're a member institution of the ncaa. they are the governing body of collegiate athletics and this is their tournament. they can come up with the most bs rules known to man, but if you want to play in their tournament, you agree to play by their rules.

---

Which rules were we not following when all of our players that tested negative showed up to play then were told they were not able to play?

aqasaw234 said:

---

PossumJenkins said:

---

aqasaw234 said:

---

DrummerboyWolf said:

---

aqasaw234 said:

---

DrummerboyWolf said:

---

aqasaw234 said:

---

wilmwolf80 said:

---

Is every player on Vanderbilt vaccinated?

If the answer is no, then they should be subject to the same testing protocols, as they played all entire game against Jarrett this week.

If they aren't being held to this standard, then everything else that has been said is bull*****

And if they are all vaccinated, there is virtually zero risk playing against our players, regardless of test results.

Are we following science and logic, or are we giving an advantage to the biggest draw left in the tournament. Let's be honest.

Pack fans, websites, blogs, podcasts, etc should stop looking for reasons to attack pack players, and unite on this front.

---

you have to be able to look at this whole thing objectively. if everyone on the team is vaccinated, we're not in this mess. what do coaches always preach? control what you can control. well, this is something we could've controlled.

did the ncaa grossly mishandle this? maybe, but we left the door open for them to screw us like this. maybe "blame" isn't the right word, but some of this is definitely on us.

---

The players controlled whether they took the vaccine or not. Not anybody else's business. It's not up to the NCAA to dictate that teams or players be vaccinated.

---

how is it not up to them when it's their tournament?

---

Last I looked, we are still a free country. It's not in their purview to tell people what they can and cannot do especially concerning that person's health. They allow transgender males to compete against females, but because somebody is not vaccinated then it' Oh you can't play. The NCAA makes the rules as they go along.

---

and we willing and freely chose to be a part of the ncaa. we don't have to like their rules, but as long as we want to be a part of ncaa competition, we have to abide by their decisions. if it wasn't up to them, we would've blown them off and played with a full roster today. it's their tournament, so it's their call on covid protocol (fair or not). the fact remains we had the ability to take this decision out of their hands.

---

Actually no. We don't willing and freely choose, which is why the Supreme Court finally struck the first blow last week to the corrupt and inept monopoly of an organization which will hopefully begin its downfall.

---

we didn't make a choice to be a part of the acc and the ncaa? someone forced out hand? someone held a gun to our head?

they are corrupt and it is the beginning of the end for them, but that doesn't change the facts about the situation we find ourselves in right now. again, we don't have to think it's right/fair/moral/etc, but it's their kingdom.

this isn't an apples to apples comparison with what happens with the supreme court decision.

---

This has nothing to do with the ACC. And in essence yes someone has held a gun to our head to continue to be a part of the NCAA. Just as in any other anti trust discussion. I'm not debating the feeling of right, fair or moral. You're definition of right, fair or moral is literally defining the case of anti trust legislation

packgrad said:

---

aqasaw234 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

So to be clear, a public school should mandate that all of their players be vaccinated for the coronavirus to play in the NCAAT? The NCAA doesn't even do that. All of the "leaks" we have so far is that everyone tested negative except Jarrett, and maybe Justice. But everyone else should be vaccinated even though they tested negative for the virus. So just accept that they were held out because we as a State university that cannot make our players get vaccinated didn't. Nonsense. We got jobbed.

Edit to add. And half the team already tested positive for the virus earlier in the season so theoretically have antibodies. Nonsense.

---

no, it definitely shouldn't have been mandated by the university or the state. but the coaching staff and the athletic department should've made it clear to the athletes that something like this could potentially happen if they're not vaccinated. the choice is yours, but if you're not vaccinated, we're rolling the dice.

we're a member institution of the ncaa. they are the governing body of collegiate athletics and this is their tournament. they can come up with the most bs rules known to man, but if you want to play in their tournament, you agree to play by their rules.

---

Which rules were we not following when all of our players that tested negative showed up to play then were told they were not able to play?

---

so they're making the rules up as they go along. yeah, absolute bs. i'm not arguing that. but again, there's nothing we can do about it. what we think is right or wrong doesn't matter. at the end of the day, it's their call. and you know how we know this? we played with 13 players today.

James Henderson said:

---

wolfpack1437 said:

---

James Henderson said:

---

Packamylase said:

---

Why does Joe think some of the blame goes to NC State?

---

I would think because if you're going to attend the CWS with unvacinnated players who are still being tested, you probably need to do a better job of keeping them in a bubble to limit potential exposure?

From those I've talked to, that's been the concern from a State perspective.

---

NONE of the vaccines would have taken effect even if they were vaccinated the day they won in Fayetteville

---

I don't see connection with that and my post

---

I quoted the wrong post

I said it previously:

This didn't happen to Clemson vs ND.

It wouldn't happen to an SEC school.

And we're all kidding ourselves if we think UNC would have suffered this in basketball.

This is complete bull**** and isn't fair to the players that worked their asses off to get to this point. Screw Corbin. Screw the NCAA.

PossumJenkins said:

---

aqasaw234 said:

---

PossumJenkins said:

---

aqasaw234 said:

---

DrummerboyWolf said:

---

aqasaw234 said:

---

DrummerboyWolf said:

---

aqasaw234 said:

---

wilmwolf80 said:

---

Is every player on Vanderbilt vaccinated?

If the answer is no, then they should be subject to the same testing protocols, as they played all entire game against Jarrett this week.

If they aren't being held to this standard, then everything else that has been said is bull*****

And if they are all vaccinated, there is virtually zero risk playing against our players, regardless of test results.

Are we following science and logic, or are we giving an advantage to the biggest draw left in the tournament. Let's be honest.

Pack fans, websites, blogs, podcasts, etc should stop looking for reasons to attack pack players, and unite on this front.

---

you have to be able to look at this whole thing objectively. if everyone on the team is vaccinated, we're not in this mess. what do coaches always preach? control what you can control. well, this is something we could've controlled.

did the ncaa grossly mishandle this? maybe, but we left the door open for them to screw us like this. maybe "blame" isn't the right word, but some of this is definitely on us.

---

The players controlled whether they took the vaccine or not. Not anybody else's business. It's not up to the NCAA to dictate that teams or players be vaccinated.

---

how is it not up to them when it's their tournament?

---

Last I looked, we are still a free country. It's not in their purview to tell people what they can and cannot do especially concerning that person's health. They allow transgender males to compete against females, but because somebody is not vaccinated then it' Oh you can't play. The NCAA makes the rules as they go along.

---

and we willing and freely chose to be a part of the ncaa. we don't have to like their rules, but as long as we want to be a part of ncaa competition, we have to abide by their decisions. if it wasn't up to them, we would've blown them off and played with a full roster today. it's their tournament, so it's their call on covid protocol (fair or not). the fact remains we had the ability to take this decision out of their hands.

---

Actually no. We don't willing and freely choose, which is why the Supreme Court finally struck the first blow last week to the corrupt and inept monopoly of an organization which will hopefully begin its downfall.

---

we didn't make a choice to be a part of the acc and the ncaa? someone forced out hand? someone held a gun to our head?

they are corrupt and it is the beginning of the end for them, but that doesn't change the facts about the situation we find ourselves in right now. again, we don't have to think it's right/fair/moral/etc, but it's their kingdom.

this isn't an apples to apples comparison with what happens with the supreme court decision.

---

This has nothing to do with the ACC. And in essence yes someone has held a gun to our head to continue to be a part of the NCAA. Just as in any other anti trust discussion. I'm not debating the feeling of right, fair or moral. You're definition of right, fair or moral is literally defining the case of anti trust legislation

---

establishing covid protocol for a tournament they're hosting isn't an anti-trust issue. the anti trust argument against the ncaa centers around one single issue.

Daviewolf83 said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

If what Davie says is true about the change in process, it would be an unbelievable hose job by the NCAA. If a 2nd test was mandated as part of a change...fine, do it for safety. But 100% no way, can you move forward w/o allowing the ample time for testing for the change you implemented.

I'm just shocked more real info has not come out. Someone in the Pack camp has to know....and if we were truly wronged, can't believe a leak hasn't come forward. UNLESS, Avent and others associated with the program just feel it would be too much of a distraction.

---

I am speculating on the potential change in a protocol to require day-of-game testing, but it seems plausible and is really the only thing that makes sense to me. State's team went to the stadium today, believing all unvaccinated, negative testing players could play. Last season for football, no one had vaccines and all testing was done the day before a game. It was not done day-of-game, since it takes too long to get PCR results analyzed and returned.

Once they arrived, they were told all unvaccinated players had to be tested again and they would not delay the game for the results to be learned. This is where I believe the NCAA screwed up - not allowing time for test results to be known and forcing State to either forfeit or play with a limited roster. State believed the players who were tested negative yesterday were eligible - even if they were unvaccinated.

---

Davie. Your points make a lot of sense. And obviously changing protocols on the fly is an issue. But legally where this really should create an issue is different rules for vaccinated vs unvaccinated. The testing only then being required again for unvaccinated players from a legal standpoint, after stated protocols, should be some serious grounds for suit.

I'm aware. It's the central issue

aqasaw234 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

aqasaw234 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

So to be clear, a public school should mandate that all of their players be vaccinated for the coronavirus to play in the NCAAT? The NCAA doesn't even do that. All of the "leaks" we have so far is that everyone tested negative except Jarrett, and maybe Justice. But everyone else should be vaccinated even though they tested negative for the virus. So just accept that they were held out because we as a State university that cannot make our players get vaccinated didn't. Nonsense. We got jobbed.

Edit to add. And half the team already tested positive for the virus earlier in the season so theoretically have antibodies. Nonsense.

---

no, it definitely shouldn't have been mandated by the university or the state. but the coaching staff and the athletic department should've made it clear to the athletes that something like this could potentially happen if they're not vaccinated. the choice is yours, but if you're not vaccinated, we're rolling the dice.

we're a member institution of the ncaa. they are the governing body of collegiate athletics and this is their tournament. they can come up with the most bs rules known to man, but if you want to play in their tournament, you agree to play by their rules.

---

Which rules were we not following when all of our players that tested negative showed up to play then were told they were not able to play?

---

so they're making the rules up as they go along. yeah, absolute bs. i'm not arguing that. but again, there's nothing we can do about it. what we think is right or wrong doesn't matter. at the end of the day, it's their call. and you know how we know this? we played with 13 players today.

---

Ok. So you're just here to be contrarian. Kthanks.

Daviewolf83 said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Daviewolf83 said:

---

wilmwolf80 said:

---

Daviewolf83 said:

---

wilmwolf80 said:

---

James Henderson said:

---

wilmwolf80 said:

---

Is every player on Vanderbilt vaccinated?

If the answer is no, then they should be subject to the same testing protocols, as they played all entire game against Jarrett this week.

If they aren't being held to this standard, then everything else that has been said is bull*****

And if they are all vaccinated, there is virtually zero risk playing against our players, regardless of test results.

Are we following science and logic, or are we giving an advantage to the biggest draw left in the tournament. Let's be honest.

Pack fans, websites, blogs, podcasts, etc should stop looking for reasons to attack pack players, and unite on this front.

---

I'd imagine there are contact tracing rules relative to Vandy players and Jarrett.

Who came in contact with Jarrett enough via the contact rules (is it still 6 feet for 10 minutes)?

Again, I don't see why NC State's baseball staff/administration, who know all the details, would allow the biggest draw left in the tourney to get an advantage.

---

What alternative did they have? The only other option was forfeit as far as I can tell. Do you think they could have refused to play the game until the test results came back? It's clear, to me, that the only options were to play with the available dudes or forfeit. The team did the only thing they could do.

---

If the NCAA could not complete the mandatory testing in time for the game to be played, the game should have been delayed. It is up to the NCAA to conduct the tests and do wo in a timely manner. Not doing so, put State at a disadvantage. We can argue all day about it being State's players fault for not being vaccinated, but in the end, the NCAA put in place a requirement to test unvaccinated players and they (the NCAA) were unable to do so in a timeframe that allowed State to play the players.

From what I have gathered from Twitter and other reports I have read tonight, this is what I believe could have happened.

1. JT Jarrett was tested as part of normal protocol for the testing of unvaccinated players and yesterday was found to be positive for Covid-19.
2. Evan Justice was put in contact trace quarantine (likely also yesterday) and is likely not going to be available to play. Typically, players in contact trace quarantine are not tested after being placed in quarantine. They must remain in quarantine for a set number of days (seven days based on the last time my son went through it) and if not symptomatic over this period, they are allowed to leave quarantine.
3. The unvaccinated players on State's team were tested yesterday and all remaining players were found to be negative for Covid-19.
4. Today, the team members and staff that are vaccinated and those who are unvaccinated and received a negative test yesterday went to the stadium today to play the game.
5. After arriving, the NCAA decided another test of the unvaccinated players was required. This is likely what Elliot meant by the rules being changed. The way it worked during the football season last year is as follows. Players are tested the day before a game (within 24 hours) and all of those receiving a negative test are eligible to play the next day. I assume this is the protocol for the CWS and I am not sure why they would consider testing day of game, given the length of time it takes to complete a PCR test.
6. I am not sure what triggered a day-of-game testing requirement, when State's coaches and staff believed they were eligible to play, having secured negative tests within 24 hours of the game. Some have speculated that Vandy's coach may have requested the additional test, but we do not know this for certain. It does appear something in the protocol changed from what State's coaches and staff expected.
7. Once the decision was made to change the protocol and administer a new round of testing for the unvaccinated players, the NCAA should have made the decision to delay the game until all of the new tests could be completed. It is not NC State's fault if the NCAA could not complete the tests and get results in time for the game. If a testing protocol was changed, it was up to the NCAA to insure State was not put at a disadvantage.

Hopefully, we will get further information tomorrow. I do believe the NCAA made a bad decision to play the game before the testing was completed - especially if thprovideged or modified the testing protocol.

---

" do believe the NCAA made a bad decision to play the game before the testing was completed - especially if they changed or modified the testing protocol. "

This is what I believe to be the crux of the issue. The NCAA did not want the possibility of tonight's game being delayed until tomorrow, and I believe this fact led them to not provide adequate time for the results today. I don't believe that NC State had any recourse to stop that from happening, which is why played short handled today.

---

Agree. The NCAA, not NC State is responsible for the testing and doing said testing in time to insure team's can participate. State is likely not the only team with unvaccinated players and regardless if the team has players who test positive, the testing protocols remain the same. Unvaccinated players get tested the day before the game and if negative, they are eligible to play. These are the exact rules my son went through all last Fall for football. This is why coaches sweated the results that usually arrived the morning before the game. The fact State has unvaccinated players is not the issue - the issue is the NCAA does not have the testing capacity to insure players can be tested with adequate time that allows Covid-negative players to participate.

---

You know, if it were any other American organization, you'd just think, "nahh, Davie is just being paranoid...no way this group would have screwed one of its constituent's that way", when time was available to wait.
But, the NCAA has a habit of screwing the little guy.

---

Would the NCAA have forced 13 players out of the NCAA tournament due to inadequate testing capacity for a day of game test requirement? Would the NCAA have forced 13 players from one team, many of the starters, out of the national championship football game, due to inadequate testing capacity for a day of game test?

I believe the answer is NO.

---

Absolutely not. But also, a lot more eyes would have been on that scenario

packgrad said:

---

aqasaw234 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

aqasaw234 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

So to be clear, a public school should mandate that all of their players be vaccinated for the coronavirus to play in the NCAAT? The NCAA doesn't even do that. All of the "leaks" we have so far is that everyone tested negative except Jarrett, and maybe Justice. But everyone else should be vaccinated even though they tested negative for the virus. So just accept that they were held out because we as a State university that cannot make our players get vaccinated didn't. Nonsense. We got jobbed.

Edit to add. And half the team already tested positive for the virus earlier in the season so theoretically have antibodies. Nonsense.

---

no, it definitely shouldn't have been mandated by the university or the state. but the coaching staff and the athletic department should've made it clear to the athletes that something like this could potentially happen if they're not vaccinated. the choice is yours, but if you're not vaccinated, we're rolling the dice.

we're a member institution of the ncaa. they are the governing body of collegiate athletics and this is their tournament. they can come up with the most bs rules known to man, but if you want to play in their tournament, you agree to play by their rules.

---

Which rules were we not following when all of our players that tested negative showed up to play then were told they were not able to play?

---

so they're making the rules up as they go along. yeah, absolute bs. i'm not arguing that. but again, there's nothing we can do about it. what we think is right or wrong doesn't matter. at the end of the day, it's their call. and you know how we know this? we played with 13 players today.

---

Ok. So you're just here to be contrarian. Kthanks.

---

contrarian to the idea that the ncaa deserves 100% blame? yes.

we could've taken today's decision entirely out their hands and avoided this drama all together.

So here's what has been confirmed. Two unvaccinated players tested positive Monday and the school knew about it all week. Avent even commented in a press conference that "we have some guys sick." It is true that Corbin ordered all players be tested right before the game upon learning this. NCAA agreed and all players were tested, including those who were vaccinated. Only the 13 vaccinated players (half the team) were allowed to play and the game went on, pending the results. After the game FOUR of the vaccinated players tested positive and the ncaa expelled the team, which in my opinion is completely justified, given that we now had 1/4 of the entire travel roster with a positive test result. These are the set of facts.

JT Jarrett and all the rest of the players should have been told in February, "you get the vaccine or you don't get to play and travel with the team."

But since we have an absentee AD devoid of any leadership or planning skills whatsoever, the baseball team has brought national embarrassment upon the entire university, and something that is guaranteed to ravage division across 300,000 living alumni. Brace yourselves for NC State to get dragged across the mud as sportswriters and pundits on every major TV network all the way through the weekend and into next week ponder how on earth NC State could be so irresponsible and incompetent.

Hey Sherriff. Here is what I have confirmed. Your a ****ing ******bag and the only thing any of us are embarrassed about is you pretending to be one of us.

Since some are new the State baseball in the last 4 weeks (Welcome!), the entire team had COVID in March. Just over 90 days ago.

These are 18-22 year old and pretty dang healthy individuals. Having COVID that recently and then having the season we have the last few months, I don't blame any of the players one bit for their choice. I guarantee you 99% of this board would do the same.

The reality is we did have players get the vaccine and it seemingly doesn't matter to the NCAA.

Further, no one will ever convince me that if this were the case with any of the other teams in the CWS (Final Four, CFP, etc) this would happen. I cannot fathom that Texas and Miss St. have more vaccinated players than State.

Daviewolf83 said:

---

PossumJenkins said:

---

Daviewolf83 said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

If what Davie says is true about the change in process, it would be an unbelievable hose job by the NCAA. If a 2nd test was mandated as part of a change...fine, do it for safety. But 100% no way, can you move forward w/o allowing the ample time for testing for the change you implemented.

I'm just shocked more real info has not come out. Someone in the Pack camp has to know....and if we were truly wronged, can't believe a leak hasn't come forward. UNLESS, Avent and others associated with the program just feel it would be too much of a distraction.

---

I am speculating on the potential change in a protocol to require day-of-game testing, but it seems plausible and is really the only thing that makes sense to me. State's team went to the stadium today, believing all unvaccinated, negative testing players could play. Last season for football, no one had vaccines and all testing was done the day before a game. It was not done day-of-game, since it takes too long to get PCR results analyzed and returned.

Once they arrived, they were told all unvaccinated players had to be tested again and they would not delay the game for the results to be learned. This is where I believe the NCAA screwed up - not allowing time for test results to be known and forcing State to either forfeit or play with a limited roster. State believed the players who were tested negative yesterday were eligible - even if they were unvaccinated.

---

Davie. Your points make a lot of sense. And obviously changing protocols on the fly is an issue. But legally where this really should create an issue is different rules for vaccinated vs unvaccinated. The testing only then being required again for unvaccinated players from a legal standpoint, after stated protocols, should be some serious grounds for suit.

---

I do not believe there is a legal issue. My son's team is only testing unvaccinated players and this change went into effect when he returned to campus several weeks ago to begin summer conditioning. He is fully vaccinated and he is no longer tested. He also does not have to contact trace quarantine if he comes in contact with a Covid positive person and he no longer has to wear a mask for all weightlifting, conditioning, or team functions. This is the advantage of being fully vaccinated. Those teammates who are unvaccinated are tested and must also wear a mask for all weightlifting, conditioning, and team meetings, in addition to regular Covid testing.

If the players want to be part of the team, they have to follow the guidelines. Same goes for the CWS. The NCAA, being a private body, can set the terms for competition and can make the rules for how different players will be treated. As long as they do not violate someone's civil rights or run afoul of discriminating against a protected class, they should be okay from a legal standpoint.

---

It is and should be a massive legal issue. Only because covid has made everyone lose their minds do i agree with you it won't be. Before the plague settled upon us, there were a whole buncha real good HIPPA and privacy laws that have seemingly gone out the window. All can draw their own conclusions, and certainly will, relative to the 4 vaxxed players who just popped positive.

Can someone help me find Corbins home address? I have a present for him when gets back end of next week.

**** you!!!!

WPNfamily said:

---

Sheriff Shively said:

---

So here's what has been confirmed. Two unvaccinated players tested positive Monday and the school knew about it all week. Avent even commented in a press conference that "we have some guys sick." It is true that Corbin ordered all players be tested right before the game upon learning this. NCAA agreed and all players were tested, including those who were vaccinated. Only the 13 vaccinated players (half the team) were allowed to play and the game went on, pending the results. After the game FOUR of the vaccinated players tested positive and the ncaa expelled the team, which in my opinion is completely justified, given that we now had 1/4 of the entire travel roster with a positive test result. These are the set of facts.

JT Jarrett and all the rest of the players should have been told in February, "you get the vaccine or you don't get to play and travel with the team."

But since we have an absentee AD devoid of any leadership or planning skills whatsoever, the baseball team has brought national embarrassment upon the entire university, and something that is guaranteed to ravage division across 300,000 living alumni. Brace yourselves for NC State to get dragged across the mud as sportswriters and pundits on every major TV network all the way through the weekend and into next week ponder how on earth NC State could be so irresponsible and incompetent.

---

Worst take in the history of the internet.

---

The ol sheriff has been at this poor take thing for a while now. Ha

WPNfamily said:

---

4 positive tests last night all vax'd kids. Unreal

---

If they're vaccinated, why should it matter?! The risk to themselves and esp vaccinated others is negligible. So many darn questions... We need answers!

Can't we just lawyer up real quick and have a judge say play ball?!! This is some crazy stuff! I'm pissed!