Chisoxfn

So semi serious question - if i wanted to move for a year+ to a country that doesn't have infections, is that largely feasible or no? Curious - I want my kids getting a good education and want them doing so in a safe environment. What does it matter where I live, I"ll just rent my house out and rent a place somewhere else and work remote.

Technically - can't the Sox manipulate service time and get that same extra year (so we don't count this year plus you hold him out a month and get the other year back?). Whether Sox want to do that or not is a whole nother story, but I would think you could pretty quickly justify the fact that he needs minor league time given how long it would be between live action.

Fantastic news.

And I should point out - California was not ran like texas, florida, and arizona, but despite all that - we are in the same spot as those three states despite having much higher mask adoption (albeit - it took a long time before Newsome made it mandatory in the state).

I should point out - my son is actually in school right now. His school (Montesorri) reopened about 2 weeks ago. He is in a class with 5 other students and each class (they only have 5 classes) is not allowed to co-mingle. So it is basically 5 students + his teacher and the only person who rotates is the aid who can help when a teacher needs a break (so someone is watching the kids at all times). They all are required to wear masks when indoors and there is no sharing of the toys, so once a toy is used it is put in a bin where it has to be sanitized. Desks, etc were all spaced out (so the relatively large Montessori set-up room that used to accommodate 20+ was cut in half. But this is a pretty unique situation and even than, I know something could happen, but I know these teachers very well (my daughter went here from 2-6 and my son is going to be in his last year) and it kind of feels like a second family to me. But it isn't like you could roll out those type of class sizes and conditions nationally. It also goes to show you, I am in the minority sending my child back since I believe they actually are limiting their class size to 7 but haven't been able to generate enough interest (and this was a school that was fully booked with a wait list prior to COVID).

What disappointing me is there hasn't been more research done on the youth and impacts of the youth, both from an infection rate, symptoms, and their ability to pass on the virus. From what I have read, at younger ages, it seems to be far more likely to be no symptoms, but once you start getting into high school age, for whatever reason, the risks start to increase. That said - everything has been limited and I don't get it - schools are vastly important in this country and the health of the students and teachers (which to be honest - I think that is where the real risk is and its why I'm surprised i haven't heard of Teacher Unions pushing back heavily) is key to that success and it seems like there has been so little effort done. I also am honestly am surprised there hasn't been a big private institution who has totally monopolized and came up with an absurdly better and more interactive way to teaching remote and just charged a flat fee for it (very on demand reading, writing, etc - and than create little pocketed portals where a child could discuss and share their work live with a licensed teacher - ensures a real efficient use of a teachers one-on-one interaction with the students). I know at this point I'm evaluating all options for my kids because the experience I had with remote was just so poor. And I don't blame it on anyone - but it was the reality and from what I've heard from friends who teach in my district (or neighboring districts) it doesn't sound like there really is going to be a wholesale change to the approach. I do think each district is hoping a large chunk opt for fully remote, because the more who do fully remote, the easier it is to do a hybrid program. But this will skew / create more inequality because I guarantee the lower income schools will end up with higher in person attendance than those in more affluent eras. For me my intention is, as long as I believe the risks are manageable, for my children to attend in person (but that also depends on level of infections in my area - and after months of that number being near non-existent, it is definitely not the case today as cases have been growing exponentially the past couple of weeks (and I live in a town that has had mask orders since May 4th).

I don't know yet - they are supposed to send that out in detail in the next couple of days. My view is they should just have everyone have class outdoors and just put tents up in the grass areas, etc (just so people aren't sitting in the sun all day). Big open space, ability to social distance, and if weather is bad, you pivot. It could work in California (obviously doesn't work so well if you are in the midwest during the middle of winter). But smaller class sizes is obviously one aspect and I believe the intent is no rotation, so any teacher comes to the same class (that way you don't have cross contamination from a student perspective - the teachers still could be cross contaminators though).

Where in socal are you?

When I saw the news I got excited - than reality sunk in - that I won't get to go, but its okay, at least I can watch

This is exactly what happened. The Sox were a bad day team and they were stuck quite often in a really bad environment for a team driven by its offense. I remember my heart sunk when Keith Foulke blew the one game they were winning. I was hoping that would turn the momentum the Sox way but no go.

My district announced yesterday the exact plan you mentioned; 2 days in person supplemented by online learning or you can do full online. I believe the plan is for them to have half of the people who elect to do the in-person hybrid program (2 in person & some form of online supplement) are going to go Mon/Tues; Wed the school will be closed and than Thurs/Fri the other half of children in the hybrid program will go to the school. It should keep numbers down and allow for better sanitation and at this point, presuming they can do it safely, 2 days in person is better than none. I hope they shift the cadence for how they do the in person to ensure they maximize in-person time and than allow the at home to really be a facilitation of what was learned in person. I can not handle more zoom - it was the most worthless experience I've ever seen at my kids ages (5 & 6).

Their SUV is really slick looking too - has a range rover kind of look to it.

Congrats!!!

Like I said - I expect puff pieces in the off-season, but I could also have seen a bunch of stuff talking about how Mitch is kind of isolated, taken more of a back seat, etc. The opposite has held true. I will also caveat, no one ever knocked Mitch's work ethic (that I had heard of)...the question is did this just increase the overall intensity. We'll have to wait and see if it is good or bad, but I like the aggression he is showing (as in general I've always thought Mitch wasn't aggressive enough).

LOL - I had debated throwing out the relegation angle - but I dont' think you can do that after the fact. I do think you could do something around the lottery odds, which I know has been thrown around in the past anyway (to minimize the pure reward for tanking). But draft reform already shifted odds to lessen teams from tanking. I think in a normal cadence you are right, they played enough of the season. I think the issue is with the league year not starting until Christmas and the play stopping in March, you are extending the amount of time players sit out, etc.

Yeah - This seems to line up nicely. Sox like to be bargain shoppers so having ability to spend, team positioned well, etc, could be a real opportune time. Hopefully 2020's performance on the field backs this up (i.e., the team does well and young players continue to ascend).

I read something the other day that mentioned Mitch's new trainer indicated he had an inbalance in his throwing shoulder which has been addressed this off-season. I love how Mitch has seemingly responded to the Foles news. Quietly hoping we see him take 2-3 steps forward this year and emerge as the franchise player the Bears originally hoped he could be.

I get why the teams not invited are worried though. It does stunt their players developmental growth, etc. You could say - well be a better team, but it wasn't like teams realized this would happen going into the season. I'm a Bulls fan so would want to watch for no reason other than to see the young players get more practice time. I also don't want for one the players to get hurt in a meaningless game either (so it is hard to say which I prefer - but at the very least enabling practice with some solid scrimmages seems like a good and fair construct.

I think thus far they are saying through testing 10%+ of NBA players have either tested positive and/or shown antibodies for Covid. I presume with all the travel NBA players did before lockdowns and the fact that they probably just see more people, they would in general be expected to have higher infection / antibody rates than a regular individual.

If the NBA does a 2nd bubble for those teams that didn't make the initial cut (i.e., the Bulls), I wonder if they can find a creative way to make it interesting (implications on lottery balls or something). Maybe ridiculous, but I think with everything going on with COVID, every league should find ways to push the envelope on creativity.

Funny part was, Mark Buehrle emerged to be the best of the entire bunch and was never on anyones list. Still, I think if the Sox ever were able to figure out their 5th starter woes during those windows, they would have had a lot of playoff runs and who knows what could have happened.

Technically Kip Wells was a top prospect at the time, as was Garland. I don't recall, but I don't remember when Jon Rauch's labrum imploded (and whether he might have been ready in 2000 or if that was 2001). But yes, the rotation was not pretty. Eldred was pretty solid (but even when he was pitching solid - I think you all knew he would eventually implode...or get injured). Note: Just looked up Wells..kind of crazy someone with a career ERA+ <80 pitched in 12 major league seasons

That was just a really really fun team. Lots of good young players who peaked, especially offensively, mixed with right mix of veterans. It was too bad the pitching broke down / was not good. The Mariners series was just a brutal match-up, partly because they were in the shadows for most of the games (which certainly didn't help a team that relied heavily on offense). The team also showed its fair share of nerves where you just saw they were playing tight after getting backed into a corner.

What is even more sad, the EU really is reigned by a number of various countries and still managed through it better, vs. the US, which yes, has 50 states, but collectively under one federal government. Sometimes I just wonder - what if, at the very least, Trump preached the US of masks from the start (or at least once we shut down and CDC revised its recommendation). That one item - could have been the difference of us being on the same path as the EU vs. being the dumpster fire we are today (we will still survive as a country - but more people will have lost their lives (and our economy will be more impacted) all because of that one action in particular.