🏈 Players forgoing bowl games

musso said:
@TUSKstuff , no "or" but "and." This is both as good as it gets (for us Bama fans) AND the end of the status quo. Lots of pressures are at work here, not just an increased consideration for student-athletes, but a general disruption of higher Ed. Where it all goes, I'm not sure. But as I've already said, players skipping frivolous bowl games that enrich other peoples' pockets while giving players a few crumbs, crumbs that are nothing compared to the professional contracts star players will soon sign, is just more dominoes in this process.
Click to expand...

That was my point exactly, @musso Three meaningful games exist for players. If you're not in those, all the meaning is for someone other than them.
 
Take Tennessee (please, right?). They will travel 90 minutes to Nashville for a "bowl game". For what? 9-4 or 8-5. Makes no difference really. Good luck to Barnett (and I do mean that) not getting injured seriously and losing millions. He has nothing to gain and absolutely everything to lose. Do it for the team, right?
 
Also funny to see pundits criticizing the players ... when their jobs depend on fans caring about the bowl games. Credit goes to a few in the media who have followed common sense and supported the players' future.
 
TheChief said:
Take Tennessee (please, right?). They will travel 90 minutes to Nashville for a "bowl game". For what? 9-4 or 8-5. Makes no difference really. Good luck to Barnett (and I do mean that) not getting injured seriously and losing millions. He has nothing to gain and absolutely everything to lose. Do it for the team, right?
Click to expand...

What does a team/player get for participation in a "meaningless" bowl game:
  • Additional practice time to develop players and improve skills across the board. You don't get that if you aren't participating in a bowl.
  • Exposure for the team. This helps in recruiting. This helps the university. This helps their brand.
  • Exposure for the players . This helps players who want to go to the next level. NFL eyes are on the players who are playing, especially if the player isn't a sure-fire first round pick. Even the first round picks can solidify their position.
  • Money. College athletic programs are expensive to run. Participating in a bowl generates money to help pay for facility expansion, room & board, uniforms, equipment and more. While the money goes to the conference first, the more money generated for the conference means more money back to the school. Most non-major athletic programs are funded by what the football and/or basketball program generates. Any additional revenue generated by the "meaningless" bowl game helps to keep those sports alive.
No program plans for players to opt out of a game. Recruiting does take into account the likelihood of a player leaving a year early. By opting out of the bowl game, the player isn't focused on his team or his school. Don't you think that LSU could benefit from making the opposing team prepare for LF7 in addition to Guice?
 
OldPlayer said:
What does a team/player get for participation in a "meaningless" bowl game:
  • Additional practice time to develop players and improve skills across the board. You don't get that if you aren't participating in a bowl.
  • Exposure for the team. This helps in recruiting. This helps the university. This helps their brand.
  • Exposure for the players . This helps players who want to go to the next level. NFL eyes are on the players who are playing, especially if the player isn't a sure-fire first round pick. Even the first round picks can solidify their position.
  • Money. College athletic programs are expensive to run. Participating in a bowl generates money to help pay for facility expansion, room & board, uniforms, equipment and more. While the money goes to the conference first, the more money generated for the conference means more money back to the school. Most non-major athletic programs are funded by what the football and/or basketball program generates. Any additional revenue generated by the "meaningless" bowl game helps to keep those sports alive.
No program plans for players to opt out of a game. Recruiting does take into account the likelihood of a player leaving a year early. By opting out of the bowl game, the player isn't focused on his team or his school. Don't you think that LSU could benefit from making the opposing team prepare for LF7 in addition to Guice?
Click to expand...

You're also leaving out the money and gifts players get at Bowl Games too....
 
musso said:
Also funny to see pundits criticizing the players ... when their jobs depend on fans caring about the bowl games. Credit goes to a few in the media who have followed common sense and supported the players' future.
Click to expand...

The hyperbole is ridiculous man. You can point to a handful of players that have been hurt in a bowl game that ended up costing them millions (and probably the two biggest ones you can point to STILL ended up making millions). Pretending like one game is going to endanger them more than any other game this season or even simple preparation for the draft. Julio broke his foot just simply running in preparation for the combine. Whats next? "Lets just skip the combine and hold out for the draft." I mean this stuff is just stupid. Its nothing more than these kids having one foot out the door and just flat out not wanting to bother with it no more. And you know? Whatever, good for them but stop defending it with all your might as if its some just cause.
 
musso said:
@TUSKstuff , no "or" but "and." This is both as good as it gets (for us Bama fans) AND the end of the status quo. Lots of pressures are at work here, not just an increased consideration for student-athletes, but a general disruption of higher Ed. Where it all goes, I'm not sure. But as I've already said, players skipping frivolous bowl games that enrich other peoples' pockets while giving players a few crumbs, crumbs that are nothing compared to the professional contracts star players will soon sign, is just more dominoes in this process.
Click to expand...

My comment earlier, somewhere, had to do with the growing concept that it's the playoffs or bust. The playoffs will be the momentum for the 'meaningless' label on the bowl season and not the dominant fear players have of getting hurt and losing millions of NFL dollars. I also strongly believe that LF7 and McCaffrey would be more than willing to stick around in such a playoff atmosphere and hoof it to Atlanta right now for the privilege. The motivation at that point still wouldn't be extra money or benefits in their pockets and one could argue they run twice the risk of injury, in that you must win twice. I would agree that after these 4 teams are selected, we are going to continue to see a rise in similar business decisions.
 
Birdman37 said:
The hyperbole is ridiculous man. You can point to a handful of players that have been hurt in a bowl game that ended up costing them millions (and probably the two biggest ones you can point to STILL ended up making millions). Pretending like one game is going to endanger them more than any other game this season or even simple preparation for the draft. Julio broke his foot just simply running in preparation for the combine. Whats next? "Lets just skip the combine and hold out for the draft." I mean this stuff is just stupid. Its nothing more than these kids having one foot out the door and just flat out not wanting to bother with it no more. And you know? Whatever, good for them but stop defending it with all your might as if its some just cause.
Click to expand...
Your post is aimed at the proposition that star players shouldn't play in bowl games. I've never made that case, just that if they don't want to for NFL purposes, then good for them. I think it's completely rational and even preferable to spend time preparing for job interviews with interested employers than settling to play in most of these bowls for more trinkets they don't really need. Who are we to pretend what it best for them?! If they decide playing in a bowl game isn't in their best interests as a future pro player, then who are you to tell them otherwise?

And yes, it's a just cause to defend the right of unemployed amateurs to seek employment as professionals ANY DAY of the week.
 
Last edited:
Between this bowl season and in the next 1/2 years of studs sitting out seasons, the NCAA will be forced into some type of action.

I believe McCaffreey just graduated at Semester... Which was part of the reason he justified calling it good. Something to think about for the Universities is to maybe "withhold" the right to let gets graduate without finishing their commitment to the athletic scholarship, which will have some language about playing out the string. Other guys may not be ready to graduate, but that type of rule would allow the university to decide whether they can come back and finish later on... Which could motivate players to finish what they start in athletics.

The best players sitting out games will eventually cost these bowl games, TV networks, and then universities money. When people start losing money, rules change.

In a perfect world I would like to see the NFL allow these kids to declare for the draft whenever they want to. Unlikely to happen since the new NFLPA deal won't come up until 2021 (I believe). Even more of an issue is that the NFL vets don't want these young studs eligible to come and take their jobs. So I doubt it will ever get to the point where college kids can leave whenever, unless some type of constitutional case is made.

IMO a good compromise would be this: A kid is eligible for the draft after 2 or 4 years. Also add some type of agreement to the scholarship that a player needs to finish the season if they start one (unless asked to leave). I do think some kids would still sit out their senior year, however a graduation clause would motivate them to play. But realistically, most studs that leave early are already identified as great prospects by sophomore year... In which they are free to jet.

All hypothetical bull shit... I apologize for long widnedness. Good topic though, with some serious changes to be made very soon IMO. Which would impact Alabama more so than any other school.
 
There are arguments for each side. My beef is with the system. First, we had to have more bowl games. At one time, no bowl game was meaningless because if you were invited to one, it was special and meant something. Then we added more and had to invite teams with.500 records to be able to fill all the spots. Now, we have so many that teams with only 5 wins in 12 games are needed to fill the spots. So many of the bowls are meaningless. Then, to top it off, we have a playoff for the top four teams. Now non-playoff games are more meaningless. So what if you win your bowl and go 11-2 or 10-3... If you weren't in the playoffs, no one remembers or cares. Individual awards are given out prior to bowl season. Who needs to play a bowl game when there is nothing else to reach for.
If I want to see multiple rounds of playoffs, I'll watch the NFL... Or if everyone is in, maybe I'll watch NCAA basketball....
 
Tidestalker said:
Between this bowl season and in the next 1/2 years of studs sitting out seasons, the NCAA will be forced into some type of action.

I believe McCaffreey just graduated at Semester... Which was part of the reason he justified calling it good. Something to think about for the Universities is to maybe "withhold" the right to let gets graduate without finishing their commitment to the athletic scholarship, which will have some language about playing out the string. Other guys may not be ready to graduate, but that type of rule would allow the university to decide whether they can come back and finish later on... Which could motivate players to finish what they start in athletics.

The best players sitting out games will eventually cost these bowl games, TV networks, and then universities money. When people start losing money, rules change.

In a perfect world I would like to see the NFL allow these kids to declare for the draft whenever they want to. Unlikely to happen since the new NFLPA deal won't come up until 2021 (I believe). Even more of an issue is that the NFL vets don't want these young studs eligible to come and take their jobs. So I doubt it will ever get to the point where college kids can leave whenever, unless some type of constitutional case is made.

IMO a good compromise would be this: A kid is eligible for the draft after 2 or 4 years. Also add some type of agreement to the scholarship that a player needs to finish the season if they start one (unless asked to leave). I do think some kids would still sit out their senior year, however a graduation clause would motivate them to play. But realistically, most studs that leave early are already identified as great prospects by sophomore year... In which they are free to jet.

All hypothetical bull ****... I apologize for long widnedness. Good topic though, with some serious changes to be made very soon IMO. Which would impact Alabama more so than any other school.
Click to expand...

The NCAA won't do anything because it's not the NCAA's problem. Remember that the NCAA does not crown an FBS champion. It's not the NFL or the NFLPA's problem. It rolls down to each individual team/player. Nothing says that a player must play X number of games. If a player is good enough to play in the pros, do you really think they care about their degree enough to pass up guaranteed money? With players staying in school year round, more and more are earning their degrees in three calendar years so giving up a few credits in graduate school isn't a big deal. The school can't take the credits earned away.
 
OldPlayer said:
What does a team/player get for participation in a "meaningless" bowl game:
  • Additional practice time to develop players and improve skills across the board. You don't get that if you aren't participating in a bowl.
  • Exposure for the team. This helps in recruiting. This helps the university. This helps their brand.
  • Exposure for the players . This helps players who want to go to the next level. NFL eyes are on the players who are playing, especially if the player isn't a sure-fire first round pick. Even the first round picks can solidify their position.
  • Money. College athletic programs are expensive to run. Participating in a bowl generates money to help pay for facility expansion, room & board, uniforms, equipment and more. While the money goes to the conference first, the more money generated for the conference means more money back to the school. Most non-major athletic programs are funded by what the football and/or basketball program generates. Any additional revenue generated by the "meaningless" bowl game helps to keep those sports alive.
No program plans for players to opt out of a game. Recruiting does take into account the likelihood of a player leaving a year early. By opting out of the bowl game, the player isn't focused on his team or his school. Don't you think that LSU could benefit from making the opposing team prepare for LF7 in addition to Guice?
Click to expand...

Many of your points are what OTHERS get, not the player:

Exposure for the team. (This helps the university. You made my point. It's benefiting an entity other than the player.)
Money. (Not to the player though. Again, helping someone other than the player. )
Exposure for the players. (Twelve games is plenty.)
 
Coach Saban is telling it like it is. But each player would have a ton of personal reasons to say it just ain't worth it. I'm sure LF7 has many too numerous to count. Some Cajun's have speculated he wasn't thrilled when Les was terminated. Being hurt all season was a bummer. He ran his mouth after the Gators canceled their game and still lost to them, AT home. Same with the Bama game in BR.

I understand that LF7 has plenty of insurance, just in case. (LF7 insurance policy) But this is also a guy that just skipped his senior banquet. This past Monday he chose to sign with an agent which says not only did he not want to play, he didn't want to travel with the team. Interesting way to go out.
 
TheChief said:
Many of your points are what OTHERS get, not the player:

Exposure for the team. (This helps the university. You made my point. It's benefiting an entity other than the player.)
Money. (Not to the player though. Again, helping someone other than the player. )
Exposure for the players. (Twelve games is plenty.)
Click to expand...

My post mentions what the team/player get. Team = school and athletic entity.
 

Similar threads

S
🏈 NCAA To Eliminate Spring Transfer Window (15 day window proposed: Jan 2nd through 16th)
Replies
4
Views
4K
RTB X Bot
RTB X Bot
S
🏀 Arkansas' John Calipari has a new defense. Call it 'booster insurance' - ESPN
Replies
2
Views
540
RTB X Bot
RTB X Bot
S
🏈 College football 2025-26 transfer portal
2 3
Replies
58
Views
6K
Secondand26
Secondand26
S
📡 LSU's Brian Kelly: SEC coaches unified on new portal dates - ESPN
Replies
0
Views
2K
SEC Sports
S
S
🏈 Gundy calls out Oregon's budget; Lanning: 'We spend to win' - ESPN
Replies
10
Views
1K
TerryP
TerryP
Back
Top Bottom