. @BaOkDfDub you know... I did not listen, but I did hear about it. My understanding of their opinion is that inflammatory conditions of the heart are quite common in viral illness, and typically trivial. They are 100% correct. but myocarditis still provides a pertinent example.

The point I was trying to make is more about the difference between mortality and morbidity. There is this fascination with stating and defending the notion that the overwhelming majority of young adults and children infected with coronavirus will survive.

As if that is in dispute... which it isn't. But ignoring the morbidity of this disease implies that testing for and isolating cases is all that is needed in order to protect young adults in a return to play model. I suggest that it isn't enough.

Yes, the overwhelming majority of these young adults would survive the disease and yes, screening and testing is important in limiting the amount of people who get it... but...

But a significant portion of young adults who get this disease and survive, still suffer prolonged and potentially permanent medical issues as a result of the disease, ie morbidity. The morbidity of this disease in young adults who develop severe COVID is not trivial.

Many are left with some form of permanent lung, heart, brain, kidney, etc damage. The percentage of young adults that develop COVID related morbidity may be small, but it is real.

And if you at the racial / ethnic demographics of the young adults that get severe COVID and develop COVID related morbidity, you'll notice that the overwhelming majority of them are black or Hispanic.

... if we take the highest risk population of young adults, create Big 12 sponsored isolation or "bubble" protocols, and an outbreak occurs, what is the Big 12's plan if somebody gets severely ill and develops a COVID associated morbidity?

It seems to me that if you are going to create an artificial social environment, control the population of that environment, encourage young men to participate in sports in that environment without pay... while profiting immensely...

under the assurance that it will provide for their safety of those young men despite the concerns from most experts... should that not make fully responsible for outcome of that environment?

Or rather, there is a huge difference between between a highly compensated NBA or NFL player gettinf sick and being unable to play for a prolonged period of time, vs if an 18 year old redshirted freshman on an athletic scholarship who is playing for free.

Is the Big 12 ready / willing to take responsibility for those differences? And if not, are these young men aware that the entire burden of that risk is being placed on them?