fivethirthyeight--2020-09-22--Experts Think The Economy Would Be Stronger If COVID-19 Lockdowns Had Been More Aggressive

Back in the early days of the coronavirus in the U.S. , many economists believed that aggressive lockdowns would be the best long-term solution for managing the pandemic , despite the short-term economic pain they would cause .
Six months later , we wanted to know : Did that logic hold up ?
And what political events could still be in store to alter the course of the country ’ s ongoing recovery from the current recession ?
In this week ’ s installment of our economic survey , conducted in partnership with the Initiative on Global Markets at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , FiveThirtyEight polled 32 quantitative macroeconomists about the present and future of the economy .
And because we couldn ’ t resist some Monday-morning quarterbacking , we also asked whether the lockdowns earlier in the year were too aggressive or not aggressive enough .
Out of those surveyed , 74 percent of economists said the U.S. would be in a better economic position now if lockdowns had been more aggressive at the beginning of the crisis .
Among that camp , the most commonly cited reason was that early control over the virus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comprehensive return to economic activity later on .
“ More aggressive lockdowns would have [ gotten ] the country in a better position ( health wise ) as we head into fall and winter , ” said Andrew Patton , a professor of economics and finance at Duke University .
“ It would also have signaled more clearly to the whole country that we need to take the virus seriously , and work together to get it under control , ” Patton said .
He paraphrased a quote from Dr. Ashish Jha , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Public Health , in a recent New York Times piece : “ There ’ s no peeing section in the pool , ” meaning you can ’ t just have some areas locked down while others see looser restrictions — and greater viral spread .
Proponents of tighter lockdowns pointed to Japan and various European countries ( such as Germany , Norway and Denmark ) as examples of how reducing the virus to extremely low levels early on allowed for a quicker recovery .
Others noted that children could have returned to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ control over the virus — a major consideration in maximizing the country ’ s economic power as it bounces back from the pandemic .
Among the 26 percent who thought lockdowns should have been less aggressive , the main theme was that more good could have been done with a targeted approach that protected at-risk populations and stopped potential superspreading events , while allowing more activity overall .
Others thought the lockdowns didn ’ t even matter much , or that most of the reduced activity was due to individual self-regulation rather than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ positive effect of more commerce on employment probably would have outweighed the higher infection rates in most places , ” said Deborah Lucas , a professor of finance at the MIT Sloan School of Management .
“ I also think the shutdowns were not very effective.
” “ I think [ a more aggressive lockdown ] would barely make any difference since a large part of the population imposed mobility restrictions on themselves out of precautionary motives , ” said Christiane Baumeister , professor of economics at the University of Notre Dame .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ option in the survey because self-regulation “ is not something that can actually be controlled by the authorities.
” In the same vein — but this time , looking forward — we asked the economists to imagine a new shutdown had to occur as the result of a spike in COVID-19 cases .
Which activities would they shut down first if they also wanted to minimize economic damage ?
With the caveat that our panel consists of economic experts — not epidemiologists — they clearly prioritized indoor dining ( and to a lesser @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first shut down , while outdoor dining and recreation were at the bottom of the list : Interestingly , most economists did not especially prioritize shutting down schools .
Universities and K-12 schools each received one first-priority vote apiece ( out of 30 respondents who answered the question ) , and neither cracked the top four activities to be shut down first .
Day care centers were even lower in the shutdown priority order .
This does not mean that our panel thought reopening schools was necessarily safer , but it does underscore @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and child care in general — help power the economy , and that shutting them down could have a deleterious economic effect .
In terms of future policy effects , we also included a longer-term version of a question we posed to the panel about a month ago : Which developments in the world of COVID-19 or the political world would cause economists ’ GDP growth predictions to change for the better ( or worse ) ?
Again , schools are a big economic engine .
The results also bring into focus how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and overall political climate .
We ’ ve written many times that they believe an infusion of additional money from Congress — whether in the form of enhanced federal unemployment insurance or another series of stimulus payments — is paramount to stabilize the economy through the recovery .
According to our survey results , the biggest economic risk for 2021 is the possibility that no additional stimulus is passed by November 2020 .
And the economists see Democrats ’ control of Congress as having a significant effect on growth potential in 2021 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ willing to pass government spending bills .
( Note that even if Joe Biden wins the presidency but the Senate doesn ’ t flip to the Democrats , 94 percent of our panelists said their outlook for 2021 would remain essentially the same as it is now . )
“ I think that failing to pass fiscal stimulus is the biggest downside risk , ” said Jonathan Wright , an economist at Johns Hopkins University who has been consulting with FiveThirtyEight on the survey .
“ And that ’ s probably made more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of course , the possibility of rapid vaccine development is the single highest-upside scenario in the results above , while a situation where the election is viewed as illegitimate — a real possibility — was another of the worst-case scenarios , according to the panel .
Yet no matter what happens , we can probably expect the stock market to pull through with minimal damage .
As I wrote about in June , the markets have not reflected the recession at large , with the S & P 500 recovering practically all of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after a shaky start to September ) .
To get more clarity on why this is happening , we gave the experts a series of explanations for the seeming disconnect between the stock market and the rest of the economy , asking them to assign each option an importance rating from 0 to 1 , where 1 was the most important .
Although some credence was given to the notion that surging tech companies were keeping the market afloat , economists clearly think the Federal Reserve bears the single-most responsibility for the stock @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the panel believes that the ultra-low interest rates and targeted injections of liquidity into the economy have had a major effect on the stock market , ” said Allan Timmermann , an economist at the University of California , San Diego who has also been consulting with FiveThirtyEight on the survey .
There was also a small — though not nonexistent — weight given to the possibility that this is all just an irrational bubble in prices , poised to burst .
Perhaps it is telling , however , that the lowest-weighted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part of investors .
As we ’ ve said , the stock market is not the economy .
Looking at the whole picture , most economists think the U.S. could have done a better job at initially controlling the virus through more aggressive lockdowns , which in turn would have landed the country in a better economic place .
Lawmakers also still have choices that can materially affect the economy ’ s trajectory throughout 2021 — and so do voters .
Just how much we second-guess those decisions , though , remains to @ @ @

Back in the early days of the coronavirus in the U.S., many economists believed that aggressive lockdowns would be the best long-term solution for managing the pandemic, despite the short-term economic pain they would cause. Six months later, we wanted to know: Did that logic hold up? And what political events could still be in store to alter the course of the country’s ongoing recovery from the current recession?
In this week’s installment of our economic survey, conducted in partnership with the Initiative on Global Markets at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, FiveThirtyEight polled 32 quantitative macroeconomists about the present and future of the economy. And because we couldn’t resist some Monday-morning quarterbacking, we also asked whether the lockdowns earlier in the year were too aggressive or not aggressive enough.
Out of those surveyed, 74 percent of economists said the U.S. would be in a better economic position now if lockdowns had been more aggressive at the beginning of the crisis. Among that camp, the most commonly cited reason was that early control over the virus would have allowed a smoother and more comprehensive return to economic activity later on. “More aggressive lockdowns would have [gotten] the country in a better position (health wise) as we head into fall and winter,” said Andrew Patton, a professor of economics and finance at Duke University.
“It would also have signaled more clearly to the whole country that we need to take the virus seriously, and work together to get it under control,” Patton said. He paraphrased a quote from Dr. Ashish Jha, dean of Brown University’s School of Public Health, in a recent New York Times piece: “There’s no peeing section in the pool,” meaning you can’t just have some areas locked down while others see looser restrictions — and greater viral spread.
Proponents of tighter lockdowns pointed to Japan and various European countries (such as Germany, Norway and Denmark) as examples of how reducing the virus to extremely low levels early on allowed for a quicker recovery. Others noted that children could have returned to school for in-person learning faster with earlier control over the virus — a major consideration in maximizing the country’s economic power as it bounces back from the pandemic.
Among the 26 percent who thought lockdowns should have been less aggressive, the main theme was that more good could have been done with a targeted approach that protected at-risk populations and stopped potential superspreading events, while allowing more activity overall. Others thought the lockdowns didn’t even matter much, or that most of the reduced activity was due to individual self-regulation rather than government intervention.
“I think the positive effect of more commerce on employment probably would have outweighed the higher infection rates in most places,” said Deborah Lucas, a professor of finance at the MIT Sloan School of Management. “I also think the shutdowns were not very effective.”
“I think [a more aggressive lockdown] would barely make any difference since a large part of the population imposed mobility restrictions on themselves out of precautionary motives,” said Christiane Baumeister, professor of economics at the University of Notre Dame. Baumeister said she chose the less aggressive option in the survey because self-regulation “is not something that can actually be controlled by the authorities.”
In the same vein — but this time, looking forward — we asked the economists to imagine a new shutdown had to occur as the result of a spike in COVID-19 cases. Which activities would they shut down first if they also wanted to minimize economic damage? With the caveat that our panel consists of economic experts — not epidemiologists — they clearly prioritized indoor dining (and to a lesser extent, gyms) to be the first shut down, while outdoor dining and recreation were at the bottom of the list:
What should be shut down to minimize economic damage? The activities and places that should be shut down first to curtail economic damage if there’s a spike in COVID-19 cases, according to economists Activity/Place 1st place votes* Avg. Priority Rank Indoor dining 13 2.3 Gyms 5 3.5 In-person political campaigning 6 4.4 Arts & cultural institutions (museums, theaters) 2 4.5 Universities 1 5.0 Retail stores 0 6.0 Interstate travel 2 7.1 K-12 schools 1 7.1 Day cares 0 8.0 Outdoor dining 0 8.2 Outdoor recreation 0 9.9 *No. of respondents who listed this as the top priority, out of 30 who completed the question. Source: FIVETHIRTYEIGHT/IGM COVID-19 ECONOMIC SURVEY
Interestingly, most economists did not especially prioritize shutting down schools. Universities and K-12 schools each received one first-priority vote apiece (out of 30 respondents who answered the question), and neither cracked the top four activities to be shut down first. Day care centers were even lower in the shutdown priority order. This does not mean that our panel thought reopening schools was necessarily safer, but it does underscore how much the panel thinks schools — and child care in general — help power the economy, and that shutting them down could have a deleterious economic effect.
In terms of future policy effects, we also included a longer-term version of a question we posed to the panel about a month ago: Which developments in the world of COVID-19 or the political world would cause economists’ GDP growth predictions to change for the better (or worse)? Again, schools are a big economic engine.
What would make the economy look better or worse in 2021? Share of economists who predicted that certain scenarios would increase or decrease GDP growth between the fourth quarters of 2020 and 2021 In this scenario, 2021 growth will be… Scenario Substantially Lower about the same Substantially Higher Vaccine approved by Election Day 0% 50% 50% Democrats control Presidency + Congress 0 53 47 K-12 classes are taught in person 3 50 47 Biden wins; Congress stays same 6 94 0 K-12 classes are taught virtually 31 66 3 Trump wins; Congress stays same 41 59 0 Election viewed as illegitimate 47 50 3 No additional stimulus by November 59 38 3 The survey of 32 economists was conducted Sep. 18-21. Source: FIVETHIRTYEIGHT/IGM COVID-19 ECONOMIC SURVEY
The results also bring into focus how the economists are viewing the election results and overall political climate. We’ve written many times that they believe an infusion of additional money from Congress — whether in the form of enhanced federal unemployment insurance or another series of stimulus payments — is paramount to stabilize the economy through the recovery. According to our survey results, the biggest economic risk for 2021 is the possibility that no additional stimulus is passed by November 2020. And the economists see Democrats’ control of Congress as having a significant effect on growth potential in 2021, likely because they have been much more willing to pass government spending bills. (Note that even if Joe Biden wins the presidency but the Senate doesn’t flip to the Democrats, 94 percent of our panelists said their outlook for 2021 would remain essentially the same as it is now.)
“I think that failing to pass fiscal stimulus is the biggest downside risk,” said Jonathan Wright, an economist at Johns Hopkins University who has been consulting with FiveThirtyEight on the survey. “And that’s probably made more likely by the RBG fight.”
And of course, the possibility of rapid vaccine development is the single highest-upside scenario in the results above, while a situation where the election is viewed as illegitimate — a real possibility — was another of the worst-case scenarios, according to the panel.
Yet no matter what happens, we can probably expect the stock market to pull through with minimal damage. As I wrote about in June, the markets have not reflected the recession at large, with the S&P 500 recovering practically all of its losses since late February (even after a shaky start to September). To get more clarity on why this is happening, we gave the experts a series of explanations for the seeming disconnect between the stock market and the rest of the economy, asking them to assign each option an importance rating from 0 to 1, where 1 was the most important.
Why is the stock market doing so well in a recession? Leading explanations for the stock market’s continued growth, even as the rest of the economy is in a recession Explanation Weight Expansionary policies by the Federal Reserve 0.35 Some companies (e.g., tech) are benefiting from the pandemic 0.18 Savings has increased among the wealthy, who then invest 0.12 It’s irrational, and the bubble will eventually burst 0.12 It’s normal for the market to not correlate with the larger economy 0.11 Investors are optimistic about post-pandemic growth 0.10 Other 0.02 Respondents were asked to assign each category a weight from 0 to 1, and all responses had to sum to 1. Source: FIVETHIRTYEIGHT/IGM COVID-19 ECONOMIC SURVEY
Although some credence was given to the notion that surging tech companies were keeping the market afloat, economists clearly think the Federal Reserve bears the single-most responsibility for the stock market’s rally. “Clearly, the panel believes that the ultra-low interest rates and targeted injections of liquidity into the economy have had a major effect on the stock market,” said Allan Timmermann, an economist at the University of California, San Diego who has also been consulting with FiveThirtyEight on the survey.
There was also a small — though not nonexistent — weight given to the possibility that this is all just an irrational bubble in prices, poised to burst.
Perhaps it is telling, however, that the lowest-weighted option available was genuine optimism on the part of investors. As we’ve said, the stock market is not the economy.
Looking at the whole picture, most economists think the U.S. could have done a better job at initially controlling the virus through more aggressive lockdowns, which in turn would have landed the country in a better economic place. Lawmakers also still have choices that can materially affect the economy’s trajectory throughout 2021 — and so do voters. Just how much we second-guess those decisions, though, remains to be seen.


fivethirthyeight--2020-09-22--A’ja Wilson Was Benched In College. Now She’s An MVP.

It took a benching to turn A ’ ja Wilson into the basketball player she is today .
The WNBA ’ s newly named Most Valuable Player was in her freshman year at South Carolina , in 2014 , and her Hall of Fame coach didn ’ t like what she was seeing .
“ Her first game , she played terribly .
I didn ’ t feel like she was ready , ” said Dawn Staley , the 2020 Naismith National Coach of the Year and , like her protege would become , a former Naismith National Player of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ game and shot just 2-for-7 , committing three turnovers in 16 minutes .
“ Finally I just thought , ‘ Hmmm , I think she ’ d make a bigger impact off the bench.
’ ” Staley had the tough conversation with her talented forward , the former No .
1 recruit in the country .
“ I just told her , ‘ You ’ re probably going to have to trust me on this one , but I think having you come off the bench will allow you to see the game @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you , ’ ” Staley recalled .
She told Wilson she would benefit overall from being the “ spark ” off the bench .
To Staley ’ s surprise , Wilson was OK with it .
“ That ’ s how you know when you have something special .
She put her trust in me .
She didn ’ t care what anybody thought.
” “ If it was any other person , they ’ d probably be upset , ” Wilson said .
“ ‘ I ’ m the No .
1 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come off the bench ?
That doesn ’ t make any sense.
’ Well , I obviously never had that thought .
“ I was like , ‘ Good , with my freshman behind , I don ’ t know what I ’ m getting myself into anyways , ” she recalled with a laugh .
“ It allowed me to understand my role as a person , as a player , and how to adjust.
” Wilson is grateful : She said the benching helped mold her into the player she is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would have happened ] if I never understood how roles mean so much to a team ?
I learned if you do your role well , you ’ ll be just fine.
” Wilson did more than “ just fine.
” Months after being benched , she was named SEC Freshman of the Year and made the All-SEC first team .
A year later , she was SEC Player of the Year — the first of three such honors — and SEC Defensive Player of the Year .
Another year later , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their first national championship .
She finished her college career as South Carolina ’ s all-time leading scorer .
It all started with a benching , and the rest — as they say — is history .
Now , the 24-year-old Las Vegas Aces star stands at the cusp of advancing to the finals and winning her first professional title in only her third year in the league .
She has leaned on her faith and the inspirations in her life as she ’ s settled into her role , and she ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — both to fight injustice and to pull back the curtain on life in the league .
In 22 regular-season games inside the league ’ s bubble in Bradenton , Florida , Wilson averaged 20.5 points , 8.5 rebounds , 2.0 assists , 2.0 blocked shots and 1.23 steals in 31.7 minutes per contest .
The 6-foot-4 forward led the WNBA in blocks , ranked second in scoring and finished seventh in rebounding .
She also shot a career-high 48.0 percent from the field and 78.1 percent from the free throw line .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ made ( 118 ) and attempted ( 151 ) .
Behind Wilson , the Aces tied for the best record in the WNBA ( 18-4 ) during the regular season and earned the top seed .
That feat earned them a double bye into the semifinals of the playoffs , which began Sunday against the Connecticut Sun .
The Sun came out on fire and , behind Jasmine Thomas ’ s career-high 31 points , defeated the Aces 87-62 .
Despite Wilson ’ s 19 points , the Aces struggled against a team @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , shooting just 33.8 percent from the field .
“ I think we needed to get beat .
They worked 10 times harder than we did , and we needed that slap in the face , ” Wilson said in her postgame comments .
“ We have to go back to the drawing board and see what we did wrong , what we can improve on , and go from there .
The best thing about this loss is there ’ s a lot of things we can control , and that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do.
” The Aces weren ’ t expected to finish where they did after losing starters Kelsey Plum and Liz Cambage .
That disregard fuels Wilson .
“ Just that feeling of being the underdog , of being counted out , ” Wilson said .
“ I know a lot of people counted us out .
We lost two starters .
Every team has lost something — but that doesn ’ t mean you count them out.
” Wilson said she didn ’ t know how the season would turn out but figured @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as well play “ at a very high level for my team and let them know I ’ m here for them no matter what.
” “ That ’ s kind of what pushed me through ; that and my parents praying every single night .
I didn ’ t come into this bubble thinking , ‘ Oh , I ’ m going to do x , y and z.
’ I just came in with an open mind with the situation.
” Wilson has already done plenty in her short career .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2018 draft , the 2018 WNBA Rookie of the Year and a WNBA All-Star in 2018 and 2019 .
Dallas Wings guard Allisha Gray , the 2017 Rookie of the Year and Wilson ’ s close friend and college roommate , called Wilson “ just a talent.
” “ The stuff she does on the court , you can ’ t teach , ” Gray said .
“ She ’ s a team player , she wants you to do well .
I remember sometimes ( in college ) I wouldn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fuss at me .
She ’ s an unselfish player , wants you to do well , and that ’ s what makes her special.
” Wilson excels at both ends of the court : This season , her individual offensive rating of 111 ranked 25th in the league , while her defensive rating of 94 ranked third .
That elite level of play helped the Aces rank second in the WNBA in both offensive rating ( 107.3 ) and defensive rating ( 97.2 ) this season .
“ All of that is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is what she does , ” Staley said of her former player who has become a friend .
“ That ’ s A ’ ja Wilson .
She ’ s worked on her game .
She ’ s wanted this .
She ’ s a franchise player .
She ’ s a program changer , and when you put the ball in her hands , she is going to be efficient with it.
” After a stellar rookie season , Wilson endured a sophomore slump in 2019 .
Her scoring and rebounding numbers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a preseason trade with the Dallas Wings .
The Aces finished the 2019 season with a 21-13 record , second in the Western Conference and fourth overall .
They made it to the playoffs but lost in the semifinals 3-1 to the eventual champions , the Washington Mystics .
Wilson finished the season ranked seventh in the league in scoring , 18th in rebounding and fourth in blocked shots .
What Wilson has meant for the Aces this season can ’ t be underestimated , said head coach Bill Laimbeer .
“ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ individual performance who ’ s carried a team like A ’ ja has this year .
It ’ s great for her , great for our players , great for our franchise .
“ Her MVP is well-deserved .
She ’ s grown up .
Every year you ’ ll see more and more of her ability and who she is as a person and as a basketball player — and there ’ s still more there .
She knows it , and we all know it.
” That growth is apparent off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ penned a stirring letter in The Players ’ Tribune , encouraging young Black girls and building their self-esteem .
“ I just want especially young Black girls to understand that they are needed and cared about in this world by other Black women , ” she said .
Wilson is also an inaugural member of the league ’ s Social Justice Council , spearheading efforts on behalf of the WNBA to raise awareness for social justice issues .
She ’ s passionate about those causes after her own experience growing up in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ school for 12 years where there were only maybe 10 percent Black kids and 2 percent Black women , it was tough because you ’ re trying to find yourself , trying to find your way , ” Wilson recalled .
“ And then I was grateful to go to South Carolina where I was coached by Dawn Staley — and that is one powerful Black woman .
“ She really kind of paved the way for me and helped me find my voice and realize who I am .
She showed me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through those ( glass ) ceilings , you can crack them for the next generation , ’ and that ’ s how I ’ ve been living my adult life.
” The WNBA ’ s collective stance on social justice this season has been empowering for Wilson and something she is proud to be a part of .
“ I know there is strength in numbers , so for us to stand together and be down for the cause , it ’ s something that is so powerful behind that .
I love @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” she said .
“ You can act like you don ’ t hear me .
You can act like you ’ re not listening to me , but I ’ m going to get my point across to someone .
“ I ’ m all for it .
I love it.
” Staley said Wilson ’ s off-court leadership isn ’ t surprising .
“ She ’ s believable — she has conviction behind what she says .
It ’ s really a beautiful thing to see .
“ She ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ She ’ s conscious .
She ’ s woke .
She ’ s in a position where people are listening .
They believe in her — fans , the WNBA , everybody .
She ’ s a new-age ambassador for the league.
” Gray also sees Wilson as an off-court leader .
“ That ’ s been A ’ ja .
It ’ s just great she is speaking up for what needs to be changed in this world and bringing a lot of attention to things , but that ’ s nothing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not easy , and the way she manages it is just great .
It just shows what type of person she is.
” It hasn ’ t always been easy for Wilson to balance being an athlete and activist , but she has found her own way .
“ I learned how to focus on one thing at a time and not try to take on everything .
Just go with the flow , ” she said .
“ It hasn ’ t been easy .
I ’ ve been emotionally and mentally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the same time , I knew I had to perform for my teammates .
I just pray about it and go on with my life.
” While she ’ s been serious about her basketball and the league ’ s social justice work , Wilson has also found time for some lighthearted moments in the bubble .
She started a podcast with Napheesa Collier of the Minnesota Lynx titled “ Tea With A & Phee.
” The two dish out news and their opinions , along with interview guest stars including Stephen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ probably have more fun than people even have listening to us , ” Collier said .
“ It ’ s like tea time for us when we get together and interview people and talk about what ’ s going on in our lives in the bubble.
” “ Tea With A & Phee ” has become popular enough that the podcast has its own apparel .
The women plan to continue the show after they leave the bubble .
In the meantime , Wilson has her sights set on advancing in the playoffs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she ’ ll be leaning every step of the way on her faith and her late maternal grandmother — Hattie Rakes — who died in 2016 .
“ She was 95 years old , and she lived a blessed life , ” Wilson said .
“ She was someone that taught me how to be a woman , taught me how to care for other people , and just let A ’ ja be A ’ ja.
” Her grandmother attended only one game of Wilson ’ s entire collegiate career , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wilson .
“ Always letting me be a girl , not just an athlete .
She taught me to do puzzles to get things off my mind , little things like that.
” “ My grandmother is someone who fueled me every single day in life .
Yeah , I play for her , ” Wilson said as her voice trailed off .
“ She will always live within me .
I speak to her a lot during the games .
I pray .
She keeps me going.
” As for her faith @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and her positive outlook .
“ I don ’ t fear a lot of things but God .
If I ’ ve done what He put me on this earth to do , then I am satisfied .
”

A’ja Wilson Was Benched In College. Now She’s An MVP. The Las Vegas Aces star found her role on her team and her voice in the WNBA bubble.
It took a benching to turn A’ja Wilson into the basketball player she is today.
The WNBA’s newly named Most Valuable Player was in her freshman year at South Carolina, in 2014, and her Hall of Fame coach didn’t like what she was seeing.
“Her first game, she played terribly. I didn’t feel like she was ready,” said Dawn Staley, the 2020 Naismith National Coach of the Year and, like her protege would become, a former Naismith National Player of the Year. Wilson started that first game and shot just 2-for-7, committing three turnovers in 16 minutes. “Finally I just thought, ‘Hmmm, I think she’d make a bigger impact off the bench.’”
Staley had the tough conversation with her talented forward, the former No. 1 recruit in the country.
“I just told her, ‘You’re probably going to have to trust me on this one, but I think having you come off the bench will allow you to see the game and probably take some pressure off of you,’” Staley recalled. She told Wilson she would benefit overall from being the “spark” off the bench.
To Staley’s surprise, Wilson was OK with it. “That’s how you know when you have something special. She put her trust in me. She didn’t care what anybody thought.”
In actuality, Wilson was relieved.
“If it was any other person, they’d probably be upset,” Wilson said. “‘I’m the No. 1 recruit, how you go make me come off the bench? That doesn’t make any sense.’ Well, I obviously never had that thought.
“I was like, ‘Good, with my freshman behind, I don’t know what I’m getting myself into anyways,” she recalled with a laugh. “It allowed me to understand my role as a person, as a player, and how to adjust.”
Wilson is grateful: She said the benching helped mold her into the player she is today.
“Who knows [what would have happened] if I never understood how roles mean so much to a team? I learned if you do your role well, you’ll be just fine.”
Wilson did more than “just fine.” Months after being benched, she was named SEC Freshman of the Year and made the All-SEC first team. A year later, she was SEC Player of the Year — the first of three such honors — and SEC Defensive Player of the Year. Another year later, in 2017, she led the Gamecocks to their first national championship. She finished her college career as South Carolina’s all-time leading scorer.
A’ja Wilson was a star in college Career statistics for A’ja Wilson at South Carolina Games Per game Season TOTAL Starts FG% Pts Rebs Blks Mins 2017-18 33 29 54.2% 22.6 11.8 3.2 29.4 2016-17 35 35 58.8 17.9 7.8 2.6 28.4 2015-16 33 32 53.1 16.1 8.7 3.1 27.1 2014-15 37 1 53.8 13.1 6.6 1.8 19.8 Total 138 97 55.0 17.3 8.7 2.6 26.0 South Carolina won the national championship in 2016-17. Source: University of South Carolina
It all started with a benching, and the rest — as they say — is history.
Now, the 24-year-old Las Vegas Aces star stands at the cusp of advancing to the finals and winning her first professional title in only her third year in the league. She has leaned on her faith and the inspirations in her life as she’s settled into her role, and she’s using her voice in new ways — both to fight injustice and to pull back the curtain on life in the league.
In 22 regular-season games inside the league’s bubble in Bradenton, Florida, Wilson averaged 20.5 points, 8.5 rebounds, 2.0 assists, 2.0 blocked shots and 1.23 steals in 31.7 minutes per contest. The 6-foot-4 forward led the WNBA in blocks, ranked second in scoring and finished seventh in rebounding. She also shot a career-high 48.0 percent from the field and 78.1 percent from the free throw line. She led the WNBA in free throws made (118) and attempted (151).
Behind Wilson, the Aces tied for the best record in the WNBA (18-4) during the regular season and earned the top seed. That feat earned them a double bye into the semifinals of the playoffs, which began Sunday against the Connecticut Sun. The Sun came out on fire and, behind Jasmine Thomas’s career-high 31 points, defeated the Aces 87-62. Despite Wilson’s 19 points, the Aces struggled against a team they beat twice in the regular season, shooting just 33.8 percent from the field.
“I think we needed to get beat. They worked 10 times harder than we did, and we needed that slap in the face,” Wilson said in her postgame comments. “We have to go back to the drawing board and see what we did wrong, what we can improve on, and go from there. The best thing about this loss is there’s a lot of things we can control, and that’s what we’re going to do.”
The Aces weren’t expected to finish where they did after losing starters Kelsey Plum and Liz Cambage. That disregard fuels Wilson.
“Just that feeling of being the underdog, of being counted out,” Wilson said. “I know a lot of people counted us out. We lost two starters. Every team has lost something — but that doesn’t mean you count them out.”
Wilson said she didn’t know how the season would turn out but figured if she was here, she might as well play “at a very high level for my team and let them know I’m here for them no matter what.” “That’s kind of what pushed me through; that and my parents praying every single night. I didn’t come into this bubble thinking, ‘Oh, I’m going to do x, y and z.’ I just came in with an open mind with the situation.”
Wilson has already done plenty in her short career. She was the No.1 pick in the 2018 draft, the 2018 WNBA Rookie of the Year and a WNBA All-Star in 2018 and 2019.
Dallas Wings guard Allisha Gray, the 2017 Rookie of the Year and Wilson’s close friend and college roommate, called Wilson “just a talent.”
“The stuff she does on the court, you can’t teach,” Gray said. “She’s a team player, she wants you to do well. I remember sometimes (in college) I wouldn’t shoot the ball, and she would fuss at me. She’s an unselfish player, wants you to do well, and that’s what makes her special.”
Wilson excels at both ends of the court: This season, her individual offensive rating of 111 ranked 25th in the league, while her defensive rating of 94 ranked third. That elite level of play helped the Aces rank second in the WNBA in both offensive rating (107.3) and defensive rating (97.2) this season.
“All of that is just par for the course. This is what she does,” Staley said of her former player who has become a friend. “That’s A’ja Wilson. She’s worked on her game. She’s wanted this. She’s a franchise player. She’s a program changer, and when you put the ball in her hands, she is going to be efficient with it.”
After a stellar rookie season, Wilson endured a sophomore slump in 2019. Her scoring and rebounding numbers dipped with the acquisition of Cambage in a preseason trade with the Dallas Wings.
The Aces finished the 2019 season with a 21-13 record, second in the Western Conference and fourth overall. They made it to the playoffs but lost in the semifinals 3-1 to the eventual champions, the Washington Mystics. Wilson finished the season ranked seventh in the league in scoring, 18th in rebounding and fourth in blocked shots.
She’s a star in the WNBA, too Career regular-season statistics for A’ja Wilson with the Las Vegas Aces Games Per game Season TOTAL Starts FG% Pts Rebs Blks Mins 2020 22 22 48.0% 20.5 8.5 2.0 31.7 2019 26 25 47.9 16.5 6.5 1.7 28.5 2018 33 33 46.2 20.7 8.0 1.7 30.6 Total 81 80 47.2 19.3 7.7 1.8 30.2 Wilson is the 2020 WNBA MVP. Source: Basketball-Reference.com
What Wilson has meant for the Aces this season can’t be underestimated, said head coach Bill Laimbeer. “I’ve not had a player with individual performance who’s carried a team like A’ja has this year. It’s great for her, great for our players, great for our franchise.
“Her MVP is well-deserved. She’s grown up. Every year you’ll see more and more of her ability and who she is as a person and as a basketball player — and there’s still more there. She knows it, and we all know it.”
That growth is apparent off the court, as well. She penned a stirring letter in The Players’ Tribune, encouraging young Black girls and building their self-esteem. “I just want especially young Black girls to understand that they are needed and cared about in this world by other Black women,” she said.
Wilson is also an inaugural member of the league’s Social Justice Council, spearheading efforts on behalf of the WNBA to raise awareness for social justice issues. She’s passionate about those causes after her own experience growing up in the South.
“Going to a private school for 12 years where there were only maybe 10 percent Black kids and 2 percent Black women, it was tough because you’re trying to find yourself, trying to find your way,” Wilson recalled. “And then I was grateful to go to South Carolina where I was coached by Dawn Staley — and that is one powerful Black woman.
“She really kind of paved the way for me and helped me find my voice and realize who I am. She showed me, ‘Hey, you can shatter through those (glass) ceilings, you can crack them for the next generation,’ and that’s how I’ve been living my adult life.”
The WNBA’s collective stance on social justice this season has been empowering for Wilson and something she is proud to be a part of.
“I know there is strength in numbers, so for us to stand together and be down for the cause, it’s something that is so powerful behind that. I love being a part of something like this,” she said. “You can act like you don’t hear me. You can act like you’re not listening to me, but I’m going to get my point across to someone.
“I’m all for it. I love it.”
Staley said Wilson’s off-court leadership isn’t surprising. “She’s believable — she has conviction behind what she says. It’s really a beautiful thing to see.
“She’s young but just so aware. She’s conscious. She’s woke. She’s in a position where people are listening. They believe in her — fans, the WNBA, everybody. She’s a new-age ambassador for the league.”
Gray also sees Wilson as an off-court leader. “That’s been A’ja. It’s just great she is speaking up for what needs to be changed in this world and bringing a lot of attention to things, but that’s nothing new. That spotlight she has is not easy, and the way she manages it is just great. It just shows what type of person she is.”
It hasn’t always been easy for Wilson to balance being an athlete and activist, but she has found her own way. “I learned how to focus on one thing at a time and not try to take on everything. Just go with the flow,” she said. “It hasn’t been easy. I’ve been emotionally and mentally fatigued (at times), but at the same time, I knew I had to perform for my teammates. I just pray about it and go on with my life.”
While she’s been serious about her basketball and the league’s social justice work, Wilson has also found time for some lighthearted moments in the bubble. She started a podcast with Napheesa Collier of the Minnesota Lynx titled “Tea With A & Phee.” The two dish out news and their opinions, along with interview guest stars including Stephen Curry and Damian Lillard.
“We probably have more fun than people even have listening to us,” Collier said. “It’s like tea time for us when we get together and interview people and talk about what’s going on in our lives in the bubble.”
“Everyone loves some good tea,” Wilson said.
“Tea With A & Phee” has become popular enough that the podcast has its own apparel. The women plan to continue the show after they leave the bubble.
In the meantime, Wilson has her sights set on advancing in the playoffs and bringing home a championship, and she’ll be leaning every step of the way on her faith and her late maternal grandmother — Hattie Rakes — who died in 2016.
“She was 95 years old, and she lived a blessed life,” Wilson said. “She was someone that taught me how to be a woman, taught me how to care for other people, and just let A’ja be A’ja.”
Her grandmother attended only one game of Wilson’s entire collegiate career, but she was “constantly there” for Wilson. “Always letting me be a girl, not just an athlete. She taught me to do puzzles to get things off my mind, little things like that.”
“My grandmother is someone who fueled me every single day in life. Yeah, I play for her,” Wilson said as her voice trailed off. “She will always live within me. I speak to her a lot during the games. I pray. She keeps me going.”
As for her faith, it’s what propels Wilson and her positive outlook.
“I don’t fear a lot of things but God. If I’ve done what He put me on this earth to do, then I am satisfied.”


fivethirthyeight--2020-09-22--The Potential Pitfalls In Rushing To Confirm A New Supreme Court Justice

In this installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast , the crew discusses the political calculations for both Republicans and Democrats @ @ @ @ @ replacing Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg .

The Potential Pitfalls In Rushing To Confirm A New Supreme Court Justice
In this installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast, the crew discusses the political calculations for both Republicans and Democrats over how to proceed in replacing Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.


fivethirthyeight--2020-09-23--How To Know When You Can Trust A COVID-19 Vaccine

If a COVID-19 vaccine went on the market before Election Day , Kamala Harris said she ’ s not sure she ’ d take it .
And she ’ s not alone .
In a recent poll , a majority of Americans — 62 percent — said they were worried that the Trump administration would pressure the Food and Drug Administration to release a vaccine before it ’ s ready , and 54 percent said they simply wouldn ’ t take that hypothetical vaccine at all , even if it were free .
Scientists around the world are currently undertaking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ history , trying to get the novel coronavirus under control as quickly as humanly possible .
But the vaccines being tested sit at a nexus of misinformation and mistrust .
Between Trump ’ s apparent meddling in federal health agencies ’ decision-making , skepticism about the seriousness of the disease , and long-standing culture wars around the safety of vaccines in general , it ’ s easy to find yourself floundering , unsure who you can trust .
So I spoke with a handful of people who really know how vaccines , clinical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how to know when it ’ s a good idea to get the vaccine .
They offered these four pieces of advice .
Look for transparency in the data — even if you don ’ t go through it yourself Don ’ t get your COVID-19 vaccine advice from politicians or pharmaceutical companies , said William Schaffner , medical director of the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases and a professor at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine .
Instead , trust independent scientists and medical professionals — your doctor , for instance , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But those people , in turn , need transparency from the drugmakers and government to be able to give informed advice .
That means drug companies and the FDA should be disclosing not just trial data but also the standards they used to evaluate that data , their methods of analysis , and the reasoning behind any decisions they make about potential vaccines .
Being published in a peer-reviewed journal probably isn ’ t even enough transparency , said Peter Doshi , an associate editor at The BMJ ( formerly the British @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy .
“ If the underlying data are not available , we shouldn ’ t consider these products as based in a scientific process that allowed clinicians and researchers to review the data themselves , ” he wrote in an email .
“ There ’ s too much riding on the line.
” It ’ s not that you have to read interminable volumes of scientific data .
The professionals can do that , and they ’ ll help your doctor form an educated opinion about whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you personally .
The catch there is that some scientists think the necessary standards of transparency already aren ’ t being met .
Eric Topol , a professor and executive vice president at Scripps Research , a nonprofit biomedical research institute , said there ’ s lots of information that could ( and should ) be available now but isn ’ t .
Last week , Moderna and Pfizer did publish some key information about how their trials are designed — including the number of trial participants and the evidence that will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ effective .
Typically , Topol said , those things aren ’ t published until a clinical trial is over and the data is released .
But extraordinary circumstances call for extraordinary transparency .
“ Rush without trust is bad math , ” he said .
In fact , Topol regards last week ’ s info dump as “ a very good start ” and would also like to see the companies release data on their trial charters , their full statistical analysis plans , and the identities of the scientists who will review @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will have to go through two separate independent review boards before it gets to you — one through the trial ’ s sponsoring institution and another through the FDA , said Sandra C. Quinn , a professor and chair of family science at the University of Maryland School of Public Health , who has served on institutional review boards for other clinical trials .
She told me it ’ s the institutional review board that would have been responsible for flagging the problem with AstraZeneca ’ s vaccine earlier this month , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Those boards offer a first look at the vaccines , and their recommendations are something we all should pay attention to .
However , Topol said , those boards can have their own incentives .
“ Each of the two trials we ’ re talking about [ the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines ] have an independent review board , but they have not published the rosters .
So we don ’ t know how independent they are , ” he said .
“ They get paid by the company and report to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people are is an important part of knowing how much we can trust their judgment .
Again , transparency is key .
Be highly skeptical of anything released before the end of the year The clinical trials for the COVID-19 vaccine are happening with unprecedented speed — which is good .
To get there , Schaffner said , the vaccines are being built on existing technology , scientists are working around the clock , and the vaccines are going through clinical trials at the same time the companies are ramping up production — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to go as soon as a vaccine gets the green light .
Schaffner said it ’ s also likely that the FDA will approve the new vaccine under a faster process called an Emergency Use Authorization , rather than under the slower standard licensure system .
But there is such a thing as too speedy .
Topol , who has worked on large clinical trials for nearly three decades , didn ’ t mince words : It would be impossible to have a properly vetted COVID-19 vaccine ready for public release before the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s had any kind of real safety and efficacy testing .
“ Capital ‘ i ’ impossible , ” he said .
That ’ s because a trial can move only so fast .
The most promising trials are still enrolling participants , and they have to wait two to four weeks between taking each of the two doses of the vaccine .
By the time they finish enrolling people , you ’ re almost at the end of October , Topol said , and then you still have to give the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even works .
If the trials end too early , it ’ s easy to end up with a vaccine that ’ s much less effective than you think it is .
February , or even January , would be a much more realistic time frame to get a vaccine that has met basic standards of trustworthiness , he said .
Trust the experts who are being straight with you about the limitations above everyone else In terms of efficacy , the COVID-19 vaccine is not going to be like a measles shot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of public health and management at George Washington University .
Instead , we ’ re likely talking about something more like the flu vaccine — even if you get it , you won ’ t be perfectly protected .
How imperfect is the protection ?
Well , that ’ s still an open question , but the FDA has said it would require any vaccine to be at least 50 percent effective before approving it .
But that still means that half the people who get the shot won ’ t be immune @ @ @ @ @ @ @ timeline for development , we ’ re likely talking about a situation where we don ’ t yet know all the potential side effects by the time the vaccine is released .
Those are things the FDA will continue to monitor .
It ’ s critical that anyone talking to the public about the vaccine be honest about these limitations , Moghtaderi said .
Both the government and the pharmaceutical companies have big conflicting interests in making sure a vaccine gets out quickly and gets used , so there ’ s a lot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the pursuit of economic and political stability .
But whenever a vaccine is developed this quickly , issues that the clinical-trial process didn ’ t catch are only going to come up later — whether that ’ s problems of efficacy or of safety .
If a side effect is rare enough , it might not become apparent until millions of people have taken the vaccine .
Likewise , Doshi said , it ’ s probable that any COVID-19 vaccine would have different rates of efficacy and risk for different populations — older @ @ @ @ @ @ @ differently than young people .
He ’ s watching closely to see who is being recruited for clinical trials .
It would be a red flag , he said , if officials are heavily encouraging people who weren ’ t well represented in the trials to take the vaccine , or if there ’ s not public data on how effectiveness varied for different subgroups .
“ I think at the end of the day … whatever comes out of this vaccine might have longer-term implication [ s ] for immunization in general @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public decides this process wasn ’ t trustworthy , it will give ammunition to efforts to discredit all vaccines .

UPDATE (Dec. 11, 2020, 9:40 p.m.): On Friday, less than a year after the novel coronavirus first upended life in the U.S., the Food and Drug Administration approved Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine for domestic use. It’s the first U.S. approval of a vaccine for this disease, and other vaccines may be on the way. The data indicates that the Pfizer vaccine is extremely effective and safe, but some Americans will likely be hesitant to get vaccinated, in part because of how politicized the vaccine approval process has become. In September, FiveThirtyEight wrote about what to look for in a vaccine, and how to know it — and the process that vetted it — can be trusted.
If a COVID-19 vaccine went on the market before Election Day, Kamala Harris said she’s not sure she’d take it. And she’s not alone. In a recent poll, a majority of Americans — 62 percent — said they were worried that the Trump administration would pressure the Food and Drug Administration to release a vaccine before it’s ready, and 54 percent said they simply wouldn’t take that hypothetical vaccine at all, even if it were free.
Scientists around the world are currently undertaking one of the fastest vaccine-development programs in history, trying to get the novel coronavirus under control as quickly as humanly possible. But the vaccines being tested sit at a nexus of misinformation and mistrust. Between Trump’s apparent meddling in federal health agencies’ decision-making, skepticism about the seriousness of the disease, and long-standing culture wars around the safety of vaccines in general, it’s easy to find yourself floundering, unsure who you can trust.
So I spoke with a handful of people who really know how vaccines, clinical trials and COVID-19 work to find out how to know when it’s a good idea to get the vaccine. They offered these four pieces of advice.
Look for transparency in the data —
even if you don’t go through it yourself
Don’t get your COVID-19 vaccine advice from politicians or pharmaceutical companies, said William Schaffner, medical director of the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases and a professor at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine. Instead, trust independent scientists and medical professionals — your doctor, for instance, or your state’s health commissioner.
But those people, in turn, need transparency from the drugmakers and government to be able to give informed advice. That means drug companies and the FDA should be disclosing not just trial data but also the standards they used to evaluate that data, their methods of analysis, and the reasoning behind any decisions they make about potential vaccines.
Being published in a peer-reviewed journal probably isn’t even enough transparency, said Peter Doshi, an associate editor at The BMJ (formerly the British Medical Journal) and a professor at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy. “If the underlying data are not available, we shouldn’t consider these products as based in a scientific process that allowed clinicians and researchers to review the data themselves,” he wrote in an email. “There’s too much riding on the line.”
It’s not that you have to read interminable volumes of scientific data. The professionals can do that, and they’ll help your doctor form an educated opinion about whether the vaccine is a good idea for you personally.
The catch there is that some scientists think the necessary standards of transparency already aren’t being met. Eric Topol, a professor and executive vice president at Scripps Research, a nonprofit biomedical research institute, said there’s lots of information that could (and should) be available now but isn’t. Last week, Moderna and Pfizer did publish some key information about how their trials are designed — including the number of trial participants and the evidence that will be used to determine whether the vaccines are effective. Typically, Topol said, those things aren’t published until a clinical trial is over and the data is released. But extraordinary circumstances call for extraordinary transparency. “Rush without trust is bad math,” he said. In fact, Topol regards last week’s info dump as “a very good start” and would also like to see the companies release data on their trial charters, their full statistical analysis plans, and the identities of the scientists who will review the results.
Listen to the independent reviews
(with a caveat)
Every COVID-19 vaccine candidate will have to go through two separate independent review boards before it gets to you — one through the trial’s sponsoring institution and another through the FDA, said Sandra C. Quinn, a professor and chair of family science at the University of Maryland School of Public Health, who has served on institutional review boards for other clinical trials. She told me it’s the institutional review board that would have been responsible for flagging the problem with AstraZeneca’s vaccine earlier this month, which caused a temporary halt of the trial. Those boards offer a first look at the vaccines, and their recommendations are something we all should pay attention to.
However, Topol said, those boards can have their own incentives. “Each of the two trials we’re talking about [the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines] have an independent review board, but they have not published the rosters. So we don’t know how independent they are,” he said. “They get paid by the company and report to the company.” So knowing who these people are is an important part of knowing how much we can trust their judgment. Again, transparency is key.
Be highly skeptical of anything released before the end of the year
The clinical trials for the COVID-19 vaccine are happening with unprecedented speed — which is good. To get there, Schaffner said, the vaccines are being built on existing technology, scientists are working around the clock, and the vaccines are going through clinical trials at the same time the companies are ramping up production — that way, everything will be ready to go as soon as a vaccine gets the green light. Schaffner said it’s also likely that the FDA will approve the new vaccine under a faster process called an Emergency Use Authorization, rather than under the slower standard licensure system.
But there is such a thing as too speedy. Topol, who has worked on large clinical trials for nearly three decades, didn’t mince words: It would be impossible to have a properly vetted COVID-19 vaccine ready for public release before the general election — at least one that’s had any kind of real safety and efficacy testing. “Capital ‘i’ impossible,” he said. That’s because a trial can move only so fast. The most promising trials are still enrolling participants, and they have to wait two to four weeks between taking each of the two doses of the vaccine. By the time they finish enrolling people, you’re almost at the end of October, Topol said, and then you still have to give the trial time to see whether the vaccine even works. If the trials end too early, it’s easy to end up with a vaccine that’s much less effective than you think it is. February, or even January, would be a much more realistic time frame to get a vaccine that has met basic standards of trustworthiness, he said.
Trust the experts who are being straight with you about the limitations above everyone else
In terms of efficacy, the COVID-19 vaccine is not going to be like a measles shot, said Ali Moghtaderi, a professor of public health and management at George Washington University. Instead, we’re likely talking about something more like the flu vaccine — even if you get it, you won’t be perfectly protected.
How imperfect is the protection? Well, that’s still an open question, but the FDA has said it would require any vaccine to be at least 50 percent effective before approving it. But that still means that half the people who get the shot won’t be immune. Meanwhile, even on a realistic timeline for development, we’re likely talking about a situation where we don’t yet know all the potential side effects by the time the vaccine is released. Those are things the FDA will continue to monitor.
It’s critical that anyone talking to the public about the vaccine be honest about these limitations, Moghtaderi said. Both the government and the pharmaceutical companies have big conflicting interests in making sure a vaccine gets out quickly and gets used, so there’s a lot of incentive to overpromise or underinform in the pursuit of economic and political stability.
But whenever a vaccine is developed this quickly, issues that the clinical-trial process didn’t catch are only going to come up later — whether that’s problems of efficacy or of safety. If a side effect is rare enough, it might not become apparent until millions of people have taken the vaccine. Likewise, Doshi said, it’s probable that any COVID-19 vaccine would have different rates of efficacy and risk for different populations — older people, for example, might respond differently than young people. He’s watching closely to see who is being recruited for clinical trials. It would be a red flag, he said, if officials are heavily encouraging people who weren’t well represented in the trials to take the vaccine, or if there’s not public data on how effectiveness varied for different subgroups.
“I think at the end of the day … whatever comes out of this vaccine might have longer-term implication[s] for immunization in general,” Moghtaderi said. If the public decides this process wasn’t trustworthy, it will give ammunition to efforts to discredit all vaccines.


fivethirthyeight--2020-09-23--The Partisan, Gender and Generational Differences Among Black Voters Heading Into Election Day

Because most national and state polls include only a small number of Black voters , we rarely get the opportunity to take a detailed look at how preferences and opinions vary within the Black community .
Too often , the national political discourse never gets beyond “ the Black vote , ” full stop .
But this year , at least four different groups — the Democracy Fund + UCLA Nationscape polling initiative , Morning Consult , the African American Research Collaborative and HIT Strategies — are conducting surveys with bigger samples of Black Americans in the run-up to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and systemic racism have dominated stretches of the campaign .
So , with just about 40 days until Nov. 3 , we took a detailed look at where Black voters stand .
Here ’ s what we learned : Candidates are getting similar levels of Black support to past nominees According to recent Democracy Fund polling , 83 percent of likely Black voters favored former Vice President Joe Biden , 10 percent favored President Trump , and 8 percent said they didn ’ t know which candidate they will back .
Recent Morning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thing — 84 percent for Biden , 10 percent for Trump and 7 percent undecided or favoring a third-party candidate .
So it seems likely that Biden will end up winning close to 90 percent of Black voters , with Trump winning around 10 percent , as experts on Black voting say undecided Black voters tend to consolidate to the Democrat as we get closer to Election Day .
If that happens again this year , Biden ’ s roughly 80-point margin over Trump among Black voters would be fairly typical for U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Trump appears to be turning some white people against him in part because of his controversial racial comments but he hasn ’ t really lost any Black support ( and he might even do a bit better this year than he did in 2016 with Black voters ) .
Of course , that ’ s largely because he had so little Black support to begin with — there isn ’ t much room to do worse .
But there is a core bloc of about 10 percent of Black Americans who are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Trump .
Indeed , the 2020 numbers suggest that it might be hard for Democrats to replicate the 90-point margin among Black voters they had in 2008 and 2012 with Barack Obama running as the first-ever Black major party presidential nominee .
Protests and the Harris pick didn ’ t have big , long-lasting effects Neither the protests in the wake of the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis in late May nor the selection of Kamala Harris , the first Black and Asian American vice-presidential nominee , resulted in big @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Black support .
That ’ s not to say there ’ s been absolutely no movement in the Biden-Trump race among Black voters .
Biden ’ s biggest lead among Black voters came throughout June , following Floyd ’ s death and the early days of the protests against police brutality .
That makes sense : Scholars have found that because of past experiences with discrimination and prejudice , Black people are more likely than other racial and ethnic groups to view their fate in a collective way .
The Floyd killing and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ systemic racism against Black people , particularly their treatment by police , likely increased feelings of collective identity among Black Americans , given the renewed salience of issues surrounding policing in Black communities .
The selection of Harris as the first-ever Black woman on a major-party presidential ticket didn ’ t really change Biden ’ s standing among Black voters at all , according to the Nationscape polling .
That ’ s not surprising or necessarily a sign that she was a bad pick .
First of all , Biden didn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of his Black vote share — he was already in the 80s by mid-August .
Also , Harris ’ s selection probably wasn ’ t as much about boosting Biden with Black voters this November in the first place .
The pick addressed other goals for the former vice president , such as making the Democratic ticket more balanced in terms of age , gender and race ; recognizing Black women for long one of most Democractic-leaning demographic groups in the electorate ; and recognizing Black voters overall for their role in boosting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ primary .
According to the Nationscape survey of likely voters from Aug. 27 to Sept. 9 , Biden led Trump among Black men 76 percent to 17 percent ; Biden led among Black women 87 percent to 4 percent .
This is also pretty standard .
Black men , like men in most other demographic groups , tend to be more Republican-leaning than their female counterparts .
Trump won about 14 percent of the Black male vote in 2016 , according to the Pew Research Center , while his support from Black women @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gap is favorable to Biden in an important way — Black women tend to vote at higher rates than Black men ( 64 percent of voting-eligible Black women turned out in 2016 , compared to 54 percent of Black men ) .
Women generally vote more than men , but the turnout gap between Black women and Black men has long been larger than that between white women and white men .
Black youth are more skeptical of Biden , the Democratic Party Among white likely voters , Biden ’ s best margins @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 18 to 29 years old ) .
But among Black likely voters , Biden ’ s biggest margins are among older cohorts .
And when you conduct polling among all Black adults ( as opposed to just likely voters ) , as HIT , AARC and Democracy Fund have all done this year , this age gap is even wider .
Among all respondents , older Black people support Biden by a wide margin while younger Black people are more supportive of Trump .
Moreover , younger Black respondents are much more inclined @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they don ’ t know which candidate they ’ ll support ( which may explain at least somewhat why they indicated that they are unlikely to vote in the race ) .
The polling by both HIT and AARC in particular tell a fairly clear story : Older Black people are more clearly partisan Democrats than younger Black people , both viewing the Democratic Party and its leaders much more favorably than younger Black people and viewing the GOP with more disdain than younger Black people .
Among Black registered voters age 50 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thought congressional Democrats were doing a good job , compared to just 22 percent who thought congressional Democrats were doing a poor job , according to a HIT survey conducted in June .
But among Black voters under age 50 , only about half ( 54 percent ) approved of congressional Democrats , while 36 percent disapproved .
Black voters under 50 ( 57 percent ) were more likely than those 50 and over ( 40 percent ) to agree with the statement , “ The Democratic Party takes Black people for granted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Among Black people over 65 , 77 percent had a favorable view of Harris and just 10 percent viewed her unfavorably , according to HIT polling conducted in late August and early September ( after her selection as Biden ’ s running mate ) .
Among Black people ages 25 to 34 , 28 percent viewed her favorably and 44 percent unfavorably .
( The rest were neutral or didn ’ t know . )
Similarly , in AARC polling , older Black Americans express more anti-Trump views and more pro-Democratic Party views @ @ @ @ @ @ @ younger counterparts .
They also seem more enthusiastic to vote , in part because they seem to view voting as part of lifting up the broader Black community .
“ Unlike their elders , who came up with fresh memories of civil rights activism , young folks aren ’ t willing to tolerate voting for the ‘ lesser of two evils.
’ They told us they would just as soon stay home , ” said Sam Fulwood , a fellow at American University ’ s Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters as part of a research project .
In an interview , Terrance Woodbury of HIT described younger Black voters as having “ systemic cynicism ” towards institutions like the Democratic Party .
“ There is a level of disenfranchisement and disengagement , ” he added .
Woodbury also argued that some of Trump ’ s messages have resonated with younger Black voters in particular .
In focus groups , according to Woodbury , younger Black voters often mention the criminal justice reform bill that the president signed into law , his support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the low Black unemployment rate before the coronavirus outbreak .
These differing views among Black Americans may not just be about age .
When looking at all Black respondents ( not just likely voters ) , Biden had more support among Black voters who were college-educated and those with higher-incomes , according to the Nationscape data .
So it might be that more established Black people ( older , more educated , higher income ) are more satisfied with the Democratic Party than other Black Americans .
We ’ re not sure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , because it doesn ’ t appear that Trump is going to win a big share of younger Black voters , those without degrees or those with lower incomes .
But a lack of enthusiasm for Biden might show up in terms of turnout .
It ’ s really hard to judge turnout at this stage But the safe bet is that Black turnout won ’ t match white turnout , as in previous years ( the exceptions being 2008 and 2012 ) .
If Black Americans are really galvanized by the protests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Trump , their voting rates will probably be the biggest indicator .
In 2012 , not only did the Black voting rate reach a record high of 67 percent , but Black voting rates were equal to white voting rates .
In 2016 and then 2018 , Black voting rates were a few percentage points behind white ones , as is the historical pattern .
It is really hard to gauge Black turnout from the polls we have now .
Even when Obama was on the ballot , younger Black people voted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — but across all ethnicities and races , younger people vote at lower rates .
So the surveys above noting that younger Black people are not as supportive of Biden and Democrats don ’ t themselves predict lower turnout .
That said , the evidence we have indicates that super-high Black turnout was related to the chance to elect and then reelect the first-ever Black president .
That is not happening in 2020 , so it ’ s more likely that Black voting patterns will resemble 2004 or 2016 than 2008 .

Because most national and state polls include only a small number of Black voters, we rarely get the opportunity to take a detailed look at how preferences and opinions vary within the Black community. Too often, the national political discourse never gets beyond “the Black vote,” full stop.
But this year, at least four different groups — the Democracy Fund + UCLA Nationscape polling initiative, Morning Consult, the African American Research Collaborative and HIT Strategies — are conducting surveys with bigger samples of Black Americans in the run-up to the 2020 election. And issues of race and systemic racism have dominated stretches of the campaign.
So, with just about 40 days until Nov. 3, we took a detailed look at where Black voters stand. Here’s what we learned:
Candidates are getting similar levels of Black support to past nominees
According to recent Democracy Fund polling, 83 percent of likely Black voters favored former Vice President Joe Biden, 10 percent favored President Trump, and 8 percent said they didn’t know which candidate they will back. Recent Morning Consult polling found almost exactly the same thing — 84 percent for Biden, 10 percent for Trump and 7 percent undecided or favoring a third-party candidate.
So it seems likely that Biden will end up winning close to 90 percent of Black voters, with Trump winning around 10 percent, as experts on Black voting say undecided Black voters tend to consolidate to the Democrat as we get closer to Election Day. If that happens again this year, Biden’s roughly 80-point margin over Trump among Black voters would be fairly typical for U.S. presidential elections.
It’s interesting that Trump appears to be turning some white people against him in part because of his controversial racial comments but he hasn’t really lost any Black support (and he might even do a bit better this year than he did in 2016 with Black voters). Of course, that’s largely because he had so little Black support to begin with — there isn’t much room to do worse. But there is a core bloc of about 10 percent of Black Americans who are Republican-leaning and they appear to be sticking with Trump. Indeed, the 2020 numbers suggest that it might be hard for Democrats to replicate the 90-point margin among Black voters they had in 2008 and 2012 with Barack Obama running as the first-ever Black major party presidential nominee.
Protests and the Harris pick didn’t have big, long-lasting effects
Neither the protests in the wake of the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis in late May nor the selection of Kamala Harris, the first Black and Asian American vice-presidential nominee, resulted in big and durable boosts in Biden’s Black support.
That’s not to say there’s been absolutely no movement in the Biden-Trump race among Black voters. Biden’s biggest lead among Black voters came throughout June, following Floyd’s death and the early days of the protests against police brutality. That makes sense: Scholars have found that because of past experiences with discrimination and prejudice, Black people are more likely than other racial and ethnic groups to view their fate in a collective way. The Floyd killing and the weeks of intense national discussion about systemic racism against Black people, particularly their treatment by police, likely increased feelings of collective identity among Black Americans, given the renewed salience of issues surrounding policing in Black communities.
The selection of Harris as the first-ever Black woman on a major-party presidential ticket didn’t really change Biden’s standing among Black voters at all, according to the Nationscape polling. That’s not surprising or necessarily a sign that she was a bad pick. First of all, Biden didn’t have much room to grow in terms of his Black vote share — he was already in the 80s by mid-August. Also, Harris’s selection probably wasn’t as much about boosting Biden with Black voters this November in the first place. The pick addressed other goals for the former vice president, such as making the Democratic ticket more balanced in terms of age, gender and race; recognizing Black women for long one of most Democractic-leaning demographic groups in the electorate; and recognizing Black voters overall for their role in boosting Biden during this year’s Democratic primary.
There is a substantial gender gap
According to the Nationscape survey of likely voters from Aug. 27 to Sept. 9, Biden led Trump among Black men 76 percent to 17 percent; Biden led among Black women 87 percent to 4 percent. This is also pretty standard. Black men, like men in most other demographic groups, tend to be more Republican-leaning than their female counterparts. Trump won about 14 percent of the Black male vote in 2016, according to the Pew Research Center, while his support from Black women was virtually nonexistent.
But this gender gap is favorable to Biden in an important way — Black women tend to vote at higher rates than Black men (64 percent of voting-eligible Black women turned out in 2016, compared to 54 percent of Black men). Women generally vote more than men, but the turnout gap between Black women and Black men has long been larger than that between white women and white men.
Black youth are more skeptical of Biden, the Democratic Party
Among white likely voters, Biden’s best margins are with the youngest cohort (those 18 to 29 years old). But among Black likely voters, Biden’s biggest margins are among older cohorts.
And when you conduct polling among all Black adults (as opposed to just likely voters), as HIT, AARC and Democracy Fund have all done this year, this age gap is even wider. Among all respondents, older Black people support Biden by a wide margin while younger Black people are more supportive of Trump. Moreover, younger Black respondents are much more inclined than older Black respondents to say that they don’t know which candidate they’ll support (which may explain at least somewhat why they indicated that they are unlikely to vote in the race).
The polling by both HIT and AARC in particular tell a fairly clear story: Older Black people are more clearly partisan Democrats than younger Black people, both viewing the Democratic Party and its leaders much more favorably than younger Black people and viewing the GOP with more disdain than younger Black people. Among Black registered voters age 50 and older, 75 percent said they thought congressional Democrats were doing a good job, compared to just 22 percent who thought congressional Democrats were doing a poor job, according to a HIT survey conducted in June. But among Black voters under age 50, only about half (54 percent) approved of congressional Democrats, while 36 percent disapproved. Black voters under 50 (57 percent) were more likely than those 50 and over (40 percent) to agree with the statement, “The Democratic Party takes Black people for granted,” according to HIT polling.
Among Black people over 65, 77 percent had a favorable view of Harris and just 10 percent viewed her unfavorably, according to HIT polling conducted in late August and early September (after her selection as Biden’s running mate). Among Black people ages 25 to 34, 28 percent viewed her favorably and 44 percent unfavorably. (The rest were neutral or didn’t know.)
Similarly, in AARC polling, older Black Americans express more anti-Trump views and more pro-Democratic Party views on a number of measures than their younger counterparts. They also seem more enthusiastic to vote, in part because they seem to view voting as part of lifting up the broader Black community.
The divide between older and younger Black voters Share of Black voters who hold the following positions or agree with the given statements Age position 18-29 60+ Overall Trump is a racist 79% 90% 84% Trump is incompetent 74 90 79 I vote to support the Black community * 54 71 63 Democratic Party is “welcoming” to Black Americans 47 76 61 Trust congressional Democrats to “do what is best” for Black people 43 73 57 I do not always like Trump’s policies, but I like the way he shows strength and defies the establishment. 35 10 30 Definitely motivated to vote 29 78 55 Trust congressional Republicans to do “what is best” for Black people 29 8 21 GOP is “welcoming” to Black Americans 28 7 22 I don’t vote because it doesn’t make a difference * 21 2 14 * Share of voters who said they “agree strongly” with the statement. Survey was conducted online July 1-9 in Florida, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin on behalf of the American University Black Swing Voter Project. Source: African American Research Collaborative Poll
“Unlike their elders, who came up with fresh memories of civil rights activism, young folks aren’t willing to tolerate voting for the ‘lesser of two evils.’ They told us they would just as soon stay home,” said Sam Fulwood, a fellow at American University’s Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies, who recently conducted focus groups with young Black voters as part of a research project.
In an interview, Terrance Woodbury of HIT described younger Black voters as having “systemic cynicism” towards institutions like the Democratic Party.
“There is a level of disenfranchisement and disengagement,” he added. Woodbury also argued that some of Trump’s messages have resonated with younger Black voters in particular. In focus groups, according to Woodbury, younger Black voters often mention the criminal justice reform bill that the president signed into law, his support for increased funding for historically Black colleges and the low Black unemployment rate before the coronavirus outbreak.
These differing views among Black Americans may not just be about age. When looking at all Black respondents (not just likely voters), Biden had more support among Black voters who were college-educated and those with higher-incomes, according to the Nationscape data. So it might be that more established Black people (older, more educated, higher income) are more satisfied with the Democratic Party than other Black Americans.
We’re not sure this is a huge problem for Biden, because it doesn’t appear that Trump is going to win a big share of younger Black voters, those without degrees or those with lower incomes. But a lack of enthusiasm for Biden might show up in terms of turnout.
It’s really hard to judge turnout at this stage
But the safe bet is that Black turnout won’t match white turnout, as in previous years (the exceptions being 2008 and 2012).
If Black Americans are really galvanized by the protests, Harris on the ticket or hatred of Trump, their voting rates will probably be the biggest indicator. In 2012, not only did the Black voting rate reach a record high of 67 percent, but Black voting rates were equal to white voting rates. In 2016 and then 2018, Black voting rates were a few percentage points behind white ones, as is the historical pattern.
It is really hard to gauge Black turnout from the polls we have now. Even when Obama was on the ballot, younger Black people voted at much lower rates than older ones — but across all ethnicities and races, younger people vote at lower rates. So the surveys above noting that younger Black people are not as supportive of Biden and Democrats don’t themselves predict lower turnout.
That said, the evidence we have indicates that super-high Black turnout was related to the chance to elect and then reelect the first-ever Black president. That is not happening in 2020, so it’s more likely that Black voting patterns will resemble 2004 or 2016 than 2008.
Think The Electoral College Is Unfair to Democrats? Try The Senate. | FiveThirtyEight


fivethirthyeight--2020-09-23--Can The Miami Hurricanes Keep This Up?

Can The Miami Hurricanes Keep This Up?

The Miami Hurricanes are flirting with college football ’ s most sacred , exhausted status : back from the brink .
With entire power conferences yet to take the field , no team has capitalized on an up-for-grabs national spotlight more than Miami .
In his second season at the helm , head coach Manny Diaz has his team 2-0 and firmly ranked in the top 15 in the AP and Coaches polls .
The Canes opened the season with a 17-point win over Conference USA-favorite UAB and a 13-point win over Louisville in College GameDay ’ s game of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be in attendance again this weekend for the team ’ s matchup with Florida State .
With No .
1 Clemson on tap two weeks after that , a win Saturday might secure a third showing .
Less than nine months ago , Diaz was putting the final touches on the program ’ s fourth losing season of the past 40 years with a bowl performance so dispiriting that the university ’ s athletic director had to issue a vote-of-confidence statement shortly after .
On Saturday , Diaz led his team to its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in more than a decade .
So how did Diaz resuscitate the Canes ?
He started by firing offensive coordinator Dan Enos the day after Miami was shut out by Louisiana Tech in the Independence Bowl and replaced him with Rhett Lashlee .
Lashlee is a member of the Gus Malzahn coaching tree and most recently worked alongside Sonny Dykes , a follower of the “ air raid ” offense , to vault SMU to its first 10-win season since 1984 .
“ Maybe we can turn things around quicker than people think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He ’ s off to a promising start .
Preaching the up-tempo , power-spread gospel and a more manageable playbook than his predecessor , Lashlee has injected life into a Miami offense that ranked outside of the top 80 in expected points added per play in each of the past two seasons , according to ESPN Stats & Information Group .
With Lashlee calling the shots , the offense ranks 16th .
For a program synonymous with speed , when it comes to snapping the ball , previous seasons look downright lazy compared @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the most obvious transformation is in tempo , where the Hurricanes have swapped out Fred Flinstones ’ s car for a Bugatti .
Last season , Miami huddled before 93.5 percent of offensive snaps , one of the highest rates nationally .
This season , that clip has fallen to 27.3 percent , one of the lowest in the nation and in line with the rate at which SMU operated under Lashlee .
The air raid doesn ’ t get its name from plays that generate three-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust , but Lashlee recognizes the value @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two games , he has demonstrated a malleable game plan , designed to target the soft spots of the opponent .
For example , in Miami ’ s season opener against UAB , the Canes faced a defense that featured four returning all-conference defensive backs and a secondary coming off consecutive seasons ranked in the top 25 in expected points added on pass defense .
So Lashlee spent 66 percent of his offensive snaps on carries , and the Hurricanes accumulated the program ’ s fifth-most single-game rushing yards since at least 2000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ secondary to scheme against , so Lashlee dropped the rush rate to 50 percent , and the Canes finished with 325 passing yards and three touchdowns through the air..
It also helps to have D ’ Eriq King — by far the most dangerous QB Lashlee has worked with — running the show .
In King , Lashlee has a Heisman contender who transferred from Houston after he piled up 81 touchdowns , ran for nearly 1,500 yards and threw for nearly 5,000 despite having four different offensive coordinators .
King is proficient @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time for receivers or scrambling for chunk yardage when the play breaks down .
He has already run for 97 yards after first contact , which leads all FBS quarterbacks .
Only three Miami QBs since 2011 have produced more over an entire season .
“ The good thing about D ’ Eriq is the play is never dead , ” offensive line coach Garin Justice told Tom D ’ Angelo of the Palm Beach Post .
“ The bad thing about D ’ Eriq is the play is never dead.
” His @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so far .
Among QBs who have started two games , Pro Football Focus noted that the only two who haven ’ t produced a turnover-worthy play are King and presumptive future No .
1 overall draft pick Trevor Lawrence .
With King flying around the field , Miami ’ s team quarterback rating ( QBR ) both inside and outside the pocket is the highest it ’ s been in the team ’ s first two games of any season since at least 2011 .
To optimize King ’ s talents in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ serving up huge portions of zone-read , a play he ’ s called 45 times already , tied for the second most of any team in the country .
Last season , Miami called it 11 times all season .
It ’ s been good for 8.44 yards per play , the third-highest mark nationally King has a number of threats in the passing game , including Brevin Jordan , one of the nation ’ s best tight ends , who leads his position nationally in receiving yards ( 171 ) and forced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is tied for the lead in receiving touchdowns ( two ) .
It can ’ t be overstated that in King , Miami has a wrinkle it hasn ’ t had in years : an elite , dynamic QB .
There was a time when Miami was referred to as “ Quarterback U.
” Those days died a long time ago , as the most important position in the sport has consistently failed the program for nearly two decades .
Miami has produced 119 NFL draft picks since 2000 ; two of them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ken Dorsey ) saw game action .
It ’ s astonishing that a team with such a strong recruiting tradition has been unable to find a serviceable option under center for so long .
But things have changed with King , who has helped the Hurricanes to their highest total efficiency ( 86.4 ) through two games since at least 2005 .
As a team , Miami ranks 12th in the country in Total QBR ( 79.7 ) and seventh in expected points added on passes .
They ranked 106th and 88th in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ least 2004 have never finished a season ranked in the top 25 in Total QBR .
And as evidenced last weekend , King has unquestionably unlocked a big-play offense .
Miami opened the second half with two 75-yard touchdowns and already has more plays of 60-plus yards from scrimmage ( two ) than it did all of last season ( zero ) .
“ The explosive plays , it was who we wanted to be , ” Diaz said after the game .
It ’ s helping Miami dominate the opposition .
Through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the team logged 15 offensive snaps with the lead .
This season , the team has 108 , more than it ’ s had through two games in any season since at least 2004 .
What ’ s scary for ACC defensive coordinators is that the Hurricanes offense is likely to get more effective .
For one , the team missed most of spring ball because of the pandemic and was working in a new QB to boot .
For another , the level of receiving polish is lacking : Miami receivers have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s highest drop rate through two games since at least 2011 .
This spot is a familiar place for The U , which opened the 2013 and 2017 seasons with encouraging starts only to flounder down the stretch .
But it looks like the ACC isn ’ t going to be a one-horse conference in 2020 , and Miami fans are desperate for a return to the program ’ s old form .
From 1983 to 1992 , The U went 107-14 and won four national championships .
The 2001 outfit , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , has a claim to make as the greatest team ever .
The players on Manny Diaz ’ s roster were too young to experience the program ’ s heyday .
But they do have a say in its resurrection .

The Miami Hurricanes are flirting with college football’s most sacred, exhausted status: back from the brink.
With entire power conferences yet to take the field, no team has capitalized on an up-for-grabs national spotlight more than Miami. In his second season at the helm, head coach Manny Diaz has his team 2-0 and firmly ranked in the top 15 in the AP and Coaches polls. The Canes opened the season with a 17-point win over Conference USA-favorite UAB and a 13-point win over Louisville in College GameDay’s game of the week. The GameDay crew will be in attendance again this weekend for the team’s matchup with Florida State. With No. 1 Clemson on tap two weeks after that, a win Saturday might secure a third showing.
Less than nine months ago, Diaz was putting the final touches on the program’s fourth losing season of the past 40 years with a bowl performance so dispiriting that the university’s athletic director had to issue a vote-of-confidence statement shortly after. On Saturday, Diaz led his team to its first road victory over a top-20 opponent in more than a decade.
So how did Diaz resuscitate the Canes?
He started by firing offensive coordinator Dan Enos the day after Miami was shut out by Louisiana Tech in the Independence Bowl and replaced him with Rhett Lashlee. Lashlee is a member of the Gus Malzahn coaching tree and most recently worked alongside Sonny Dykes, a follower of the “air raid” offense, to vault SMU to its first 10-win season since 1984. “Maybe we can turn things around quicker than people think,” Lashlee said this offseason. He’s off to a promising start.
Preaching the up-tempo, power-spread gospel and a more manageable playbook than his predecessor, Lashlee has injected life into a Miami offense that ranked outside of the top 80 in expected points added per play in each of the past two seasons, according to ESPN Stats & Information Group. With Lashlee calling the shots, the offense ranks 16th.
For a program synonymous with speed, when it comes to snapping the ball, previous seasons look downright lazy compared with 2020.
Outside of personnel, the most obvious transformation is in tempo, where the Hurricanes have swapped out Fred Flinstones’s car for a Bugatti. Last season, Miami huddled before 93.5 percent of offensive snaps, one of the highest rates nationally. This season, that clip has fallen to 27.3 percent, one of the lowest in the nation and in line with the rate at which SMU operated under Lashlee.
The air raid doesn’t get its name from plays that generate three-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust, but Lashlee recognizes the value of a balanced offense. And in two games, he has demonstrated a malleable game plan, designed to target the soft spots of the opponent. For example, in Miami’s season opener against UAB, the Canes faced a defense that featured four returning all-conference defensive backs and a secondary coming off consecutive seasons ranked in the top 25 in expected points added on pass defense. So Lashlee spent 66 percent of his offensive snaps on carries, and the Hurricanes accumulated the program’s fifth-most single-game rushing yards since at least 2000.
Week 2 brought a less formidable secondary to scheme against, so Lashlee dropped the rush rate to 50 percent, and the Canes finished with 325 passing yards and three touchdowns through the air..
It also helps to have D’Eriq King — by far the most dangerous QB Lashlee has worked with — running the show. In King, Lashlee has a Heisman contender who transferred from Houston after he piled up 81 touchdowns, ran for nearly 1,500 yards and threw for nearly 5,000 despite having four different offensive coordinators.
King is proficient at rolling outside the pocket to buy time for receivers or scrambling for chunk yardage when the play breaks down. He has already run for 97 yards after first contact, which leads all FBS quarterbacks. Only three Miami QBs since 2011 have produced more over an entire season.
“The good thing about D’Eriq is the play is never dead,” offensive line coach Garin Justice told Tom D’Angelo of the Palm Beach Post. “The bad thing about D’Eriq is the play is never dead.”
His decision-making has been Dean’s List-worthy so far. Among QBs who have started two games, Pro Football Focus noted that the only two who haven’t produced a turnover-worthy play are King and presumptive future No. 1 overall draft pick Trevor Lawrence. With King flying around the field, Miami’s team quarterback rating (QBR) both inside and outside the pocket is the highest it’s been in the team’s first two games of any season since at least 2011.
Is ‘Quarterback U’ back? Miami’s team QBR in the first two games of each season by location in and out of the pocket QBR by location Season In pocket Out of pocket Total QBR 2020 87.3 98.7 79.6 2019 70.9 14.3 43.1 2018 50.6 12.9 43.4 2017 84.4 37.3 75.6 2016 38.5 31.6 16.6 2015 81.7 3.5 62.7 2014 22.8 74.1 37.4 2013 31.8 20.9 49.2 2012 46.3 32.3 48.1 2011 62.2 19.9 52.8 Source: ESPN Stats & Information Group
To optimize King’s talents in mobility and split-second decision-making, Lashlee is serving up huge portions of zone-read, a play he’s called 45 times already, tied for the second most of any team in the country. Last season, Miami called it 11 times all season. It’s been good for 8.44 yards per play, the third-highest mark nationally
King has a number of threats in the passing game, including Brevin Jordan, one of the nation’s best tight ends, who leads his position nationally in receiving yards (171) and forced missed tackles (three), and is tied for the lead in receiving touchdowns (two).
It can’t be overstated that in King, Miami has a wrinkle it hasn’t had in years: an elite, dynamic QB.
There was a time when Miami was referred to as “Quarterback U.” Those days died a long time ago, as the most important position in the sport has consistently failed the program for nearly two decades. Miami has produced 119 NFL draft picks since 2000; two of them were QBs, and only one (Ken Dorsey) saw game action. It’s astonishing that a team with such a strong recruiting tradition has been unable to find a serviceable option under center for so long.
But things have changed with King, who has helped the Hurricanes to their highest total efficiency (86.4) through two games since at least 2005. As a team, Miami ranks 12th in the country in Total QBR (79.7) and seventh in expected points added on passes. They ranked 106th and 88th in the metrics last season and since at least 2004 have never finished a season ranked in the top 25 in Total QBR.
And as evidenced last weekend, King has unquestionably unlocked a big-play offense. Miami opened the second half with two 75-yard touchdowns and already has more plays of 60-plus yards from scrimmage (two) than it did all of last season (zero). “The explosive plays, it was who we wanted to be,” Diaz said after the game.
It’s helping Miami dominate the opposition. Through its first two games last season, the team logged 15 offensive snaps with the lead. This season, the team has 108, more than it’s had through two games in any season since at least 2004.
What’s scary for ACC defensive coordinators is that the Hurricanes offense is likely to get more effective. For one, the team missed most of spring ball because of the pandemic and was working in a new QB to boot. For another, the level of receiving polish is lacking: Miami receivers have dropped six passes, representing the team’s highest drop rate through two games since at least 2011.
This spot is a familiar place for The U, which opened the 2013 and 2017 seasons with encouraging starts only to flounder down the stretch. But it looks like the ACC isn’t going to be a one-horse conference in 2020, and Miami fans are desperate for a return to the program’s old form. From 1983 to 1992, The U went 107-14 and won four national championships. The 2001 outfit, which ran the table behind six All-Americans, has a claim to make as the greatest team ever.
The players on Manny Diaz’s roster were too young to experience the program’s heyday. But they do have a say in its resurrection.