Christian McCaffrey skipping the Sun Bowl

[zifnab32]

I don't like it, but I understand it.

This new trend just proves further that college sports has jumped the shark and no longer means what it used to mean...................playing for the love of the game, sportsmanship, the pageantry and excitement of going to a bowl and all that brings for each team.

Now it's one cold hearted question and one cold hearted question only, are you in the Championship bracket? No?..........then who cares I'm out.

When Jaylen Smith got hurt last year, he went from a top 5 pick to a 2nd rounder. That make his initial contract change from a 4 year, 23.5 million deal to a 4 year, 6.5 million deal. That's 17 million lost.

The El Paso Toilet bowl isn't worth 17 million to McCaffery.

 

[Milehighhawk]

I think the saddest part of this discussion is just cementing the reality that college football has become all about the few stars that have a shot (not even a guarantee to make it) in the NFL and part of the result is that the of college players that won't seen an NFL down are cast aside as if their contributions to the game don't matter.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

It will make an 8.33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333% difference.

lol, that's really going to satisfy you? Wow, these bowl games seem so much better this year! Must be cause there's 4 less of them!

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

I think the saddest part of this discussion is just cementing the reality that college football has become all about the few stars that have a shot (not even a guarantee to make it) in the NFL and part of the result is that the of college players that won't seen an NFL down are cast aside as if their contributions to the game don't matter.

Honestly, I think it's just a player driven correction to the artificial barriers put in place between college and the NFL.

The NFL adopted a minimum age requirement for entry in the NFL (the 3 years out of high school rule). In part, this was to prevent players from coming out too early (Clarett/Mike Williams). It was seen as a concession between the NCAA and the NFL to force players to stay at college and presumably enrich schools. The NFL still gets their free development league of sorts and schools continue to make profits on student athletes.

This isn't really any different than the college basketball 'one and done' dynamic. Except it's more punitive to the athletes as a whole and forces increased risk.

If college football was all about the few stars, then you wouldn't see such resistance to a profit sharing scheme. Or schools could simply not charge for the games and become truly non profit entities as it pertains to sporting events. The bottom line is, when a player (or for that matter just a student at the school studying any discipline) is at a level where they have enough talent to ply their services in the marketplace -- they should be allowed to make that decision.

To artificially force someone to provide services just because of an arbitrary rule is going to change the labor dynamic. In this case, the student athletes who are imminently eligible to serve professionally weigh risk and loss of value against what is in essence nothing in return.

 

[fenderbender123]

It will make an 8.33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333% difference.

lol, that's really going to satisfy you? Wow, these bowl games seem so much better this year! Must be cause there's 4 less of them!

It will make a difference. Diminishing returns is a real thing, and the amount of bowl games has surpassed the equilibrium.

 

[Uncle Si]

It will make an 8.33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333% difference.

lol, that's really going to satisfy you? Wow, these bowl games seem so much better this year! Must be cause there's 4 less of them!

It will make a difference. Diminishing returns is a real thing, and the amount of bowl games has surpassed the equilibrium.

Like you didn't watch the Air Force Reserves Celebration Bowl....

 

[Sgt. Largent]

It will make an 8.33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333% difference.

lol, that's really going to satisfy you? Wow, these bowl games seem so much better this year! Must be cause there's 4 less of them!

It will make a difference. Diminishing returns is a real thing, and the amount of bowl games has surpassed the equilibrium.

There's always been a lot of bowl games, and yes most of them are uninteresting to the large majority of the country.

But they're not to the hosting city and the two teams and their fans. It helps to build an up and coming program to go to a bowl game, even a smaller one.

 

[fenderbender123]

There hasn't always been a lot of bowl games. It started with one, and then expanded to 5, then to 8 in the 60s, and it's been expanding ever since.

As a long-time fan of college football, I can honestly say that all these non-major bowl games makes them less fun. Last year I barely even cared about UW's bowl game. When people's teams win 8 or 9 games and get invited to play a non-major bowl game, they think "why do I even care when we could have been in a non-major bowl game with 6 wins?" If we eliminate some of these bowls so we can leave out .500 and barely over .500 teams, fans and players would feel like playing in a bowl game is a bigger deal, and would be more likely to participate.

The NCAA would be very wise to consider the long-term impact on playing too many bowl games. Of course, if they ruin the whole bowl game tradition with over-saturation, it could lead to them needing to eliminate them altogether in favor of a bigger playoff, which would make a lot of people happy. In the short term, sure, the bowl games are making money and getting a lot of ratings...but you know what else did? That episode of Happy Days where Fonzie jumped over the shark...and we all know what happened after that.

 

[Uncle Si]

For whatever it's worth, one thing I've heard from alot of coaches in the buildup to these bowl games is how helpful the extra practices are. They get more time with the younger players and developing their team that what's afforded in the very short and chaotic "regular" season.

Maybe the Bowl games are just that... a way to extend the season for the players and coaches.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

The NCAA would be very wise to consider the long-term impact on playing too many bowl games. Of course, if they ruin the whole bowl game tradition with over-saturation, it could lead to them needing to eliminate them altogether in favor of a bigger playoff, which would make a lot of people happy. In the short term, sure, the bowl games are making money and getting a lot of ratings...but you know what else did? That episode of Happy Days where Fonzie jumped over the shark...and we all know what happened after that.

I think it's pretty clear that the NCAA agrees with me, the more bowl games, the more exposure and revenue for the NCAA and the schools.

I get what you're saying, I just don't agree with your assessment that it's a negative. The only negative is when the bowl is poorly attended and losing money, then THAT'S when it usually goes away. Remember the Seattle Bowl here in Seattle like 15 years ago? It stunk, lost money and was blown up.

 

[Milehighhawk]

I think the saddest part of this discussion is just cementing the reality that college football has become all about the few stars that have a shot (not even a guarantee to make it) in the NFL and part of the result is that the of college players that won't seen an NFL down are cast aside as if their contributions to the game don't matter.

Honestly, I think it's just a player driven correction to the artificial barriers put in place between college and the NFL.

The NFL adopted a minimum age requirement for entry in the NFL (the 3 years out of high school rule). In part, this was to prevent players from coming out too early (Clarett/Mike Williams). It was seen as a concession between the NCAA and the NFL to force players to stay at college and presumably enrich schools. The NFL still gets their free development league of sorts and schools continue to make profits on student athletes.

This isn't really any different than the college basketball 'one and done' dynamic. Except it's more punitive to the athletes as a whole and forces increased risk.

If college football was all about the few stars, then you wouldn't see such resistance to a profit sharing scheme. Or schools could simply not charge for the games and become truly non profit entities as it pertains to sporting events. The bottom line is, when a player (or for that matter just a student at the school studying any discipline) is at a level where they have enough talent to ply their services in the marketplace -- they should be allowed to make that decision.

To artificially force someone to provide services just because of an arbitrary rule is going to change the labor dynamic. In this case, the student athletes who are imminently eligible to serve professionally weigh risk and loss of value against what is in essence nothing in return.

Firstly, thank you for the well thought-out response and overlooking my rushed typing. I concede that the schools do still largely value the average individual student athlete (not without exceptions), however I would submit the media seems to not consider them at all when forming narratives around these topics (pay for play, bowls, etc..). There are several issues with considering performance based pay for college players (I am inferring this from your statement here so feel free to correct) which also apply to players opting out of bowl games. You see the school bears the vast majority of the risk of a player throughout their time in college. The school provides the platform and everything except the performance on the field in games or at practice. This includes not only tuition, but also transportation, media coverage, lodging, and all kinds of allowances (granted not much "spending" cash).

The short of it the school is providing a complete platform from which that player has the opportunity to cash in at the next level should they perform. Now the player is saying hey, thanks for helping me this far, but I no longer need you. I would think any scholarship offer should have some contractual demands in return that aren't being met. I mean if a player decides to quit football mid-way through a four year scholarship, I know in most instances, they forfeit at a minimum a portion of that scholarship. It seems like, based upon the way the system is set up today, the player is failing to live up to their end of the bargain by opting out simply because they are a star.

To take this a step further, imagine if every scholarship player on the team found themselves in a situation where they became risk averse to participating in a bowl game for fear of future loss of earnings (of which the school bears zero responsibility to the student). If the school, for that reason, couldn't field a team for the bowl game and therefore lost the financial rewards they would otherwise obtain to help fund future programs, how would we view that? It would seem there has to be some responsibility for the athlete to play in good faith or somehow reciprocate for non-participation.

 

[Hasselbeck]

So he is going off of his resume at Stanford and not gonna finish to go off of the bowl game. Sounds like a Loser that has his own interests at heart above the team's. That aughta make him some brownie points in the draft.

It's the Sun Bowl. :lol:

 

[Seahawkfan80]

So he is going off of his resume at Stanford and not gonna finish to go off of the bowl game. Sounds like a Loser that has his own interests at heart above the team's. That aughta make him some brownie points in the draft.

It's the Sun Bowl. :lol:

Ahh....I see....not a good bowl game like the Idaho Potato Bowl. :shock:

 

[Milehighhawk]

Funny how people act like a full ride scholarship means nothing... at a place like Stanford, that's what... 100k???

That's 25k per year for a teenager.

And all this talk about football injuries, like "what a traumatic experience" ... really?

More than you can make in on a fishing boat or crabber in Alaska risking your effing life.... like so many of my generation did. I worked on a gill netter, and in a machine shop to pay my way through college at 18/19 years old. Almost lost my life in a storm, and I did lose a finger at 19 years old because of an idiot boss. I finished paying off my student loans for my engineering degree at 36 freaking years old.

So, while everyone wants to cry "poor baby'" and coddle these football players, I'm playing the world's tiniest effing violin.


I swear, people are so freaking spoiled these days it's utterly mind boggling. Millennials my ass, it's the "little bitch" generation.

I must say, I appreciate this "rant style" post as much as Attyla's more reasoned response. Aren't message boards fun? I generally concur with the thought process, nothing is a given.

Also, if Stanford is anything like the schools my oldest is looking at now, it is more like 200K+ in total. Which, for an 18-22 year old is a decent chunk of change.

 

[SeatownJay]

There hasn't always been a lot of bowl games. It started with one, and then expanded to 5, then to 8 in the 60s, and it's been expanding ever since.

As a long-time fan of college football, I can honestly say that all these non-major bowl games makes them less fun. Last year I barely even cared about UW's bowl game. When people's teams win 8 or 9 games and get invited to play a non-major bowl game, they think "why do I even care when we could have been in a non-major bowl game with 6 wins?" If we eliminate some of these bowls so we can leave out .500 and barely over .500 teams, fans and players would feel like playing in a bowl game is a bigger deal, and would be more likely to participate.

The NCAA would be very wise to consider the long-term impact on playing too many bowl games. Of course, if they ruin the whole bowl game tradition with over-saturation, it could lead to them needing to eliminate them altogether in favor of a bigger playoff, which would make a lot of people happy. In the short term, sure, the bowl games are making money and getting a lot of ratings...but you know what else did? That episode of Happy Days where Fonzie jumped over the shark...and we all know what happened after that.

The explosion of bowl games coincided with the explosion of cable and, more specifically, ESPN. From 1978, when the NCAA officially split division 1 into the A & AA subdivisions, to 1996, there were 15-19 bowl games a year. From 1997 to 2005 the number of games rose from 20 up to 28. 2006 saw the number of games jump to 32 and more games were added every couple of years until we hit 42 bowl games last year. This year is the first time since 1995 that there are fewer bowl games than the year before with only 41.

The biggest benefactors of the increase of the bowl games, other than the broadcasters, have been the smaller conferences. In 1996 there were 36 bowl teams, 29 of which were from the power conferences (ACC, Big 10, Big 12, Big East, Pac 12, SEC). That's roughly 81% of the bowl teams. By 2006, when we hit 64 bowl teams, only 67% of them were from the power conferences. This year there are 80 bowl teams, only 56% of which are from the power conferences (ACC, Big 10, Big 12, Pac 12, SEC). so, in the past 20 years the smaller conferences have saw their number of bowl participants rise from 7 teams to 35.

 

[kobebryant]

Funny how people act like a full ride scholarship means nothing... at a place like Stanford, that's what... 100k???

That's 25k per year for a teenager.

And all this talk about football injuries, like "what a traumatic experience" ... really?

More than you can make in on a fishing boat or crabber in Alaska risking your effing life.... like so many of my generation did. I worked on a gill netter, and in a machine shop to pay my way through college at 18/19 years old. Almost lost my life in a storm, and I did lose a finger at 19 years old because of an idiot boss. I finished paying off my student loans for my engineering degree at 36 freaking years old.

So, while everyone wants to cry "poor baby'" and coddle these football players, I'm playing the world's tiniest effing violin.


I swear, people are so freaking spoiled these days it's utterly mind boggling. Millennials my ass, it's the "little bitch" generation.

Final exams are over and he isn't returning to school in January, that means it is time to be a pro and enter the workforce, which he is doing.

He's paid back the value of that scholarship ten-fold with every appearance on ESPN, FOX, in magazines, and on billboards wearing Stanford colors.

There is nothing left for him at the college level.

 

[Largent80]

Damn, what has happened to pride and tradition?...Money and greed is the answer. Grow a pair Mc Caffrey.

What a Pussy move, I might get hurt and squander my NFL career...PLEASE. People are asking if he is Seahawky?...NO, he screams Joey Galloway all day.

 

[Hasselbeck]

Funny how people act like a full ride scholarship means nothing... at a place like Stanford, that's what... 100k???

How much money has Stanford made off the back of Christian McCaffrey? Hint: It's a lot more than 100K.

That's 25k per year for a teenager.

And all this talk about football injuries, like "what a traumatic experience" ... really?

More than you can make in on a fishing boat or crabber in Alaska risking your effing life.... like so many of my generation did. I worked on a gill netter, and in a machine shop to pay my way through college at 18/19 years old. Almost lost my life in a storm, and I did lose a finger at 19 years old because of an idiot boss. I finished paying off my student loans for my engineering degree at 36 freaking years old.

So, while everyone wants to cry "poor baby'" and coddle these football players, I'm playing the world's tiniest effing violin.

Z Man, I like you and your posts are on point usually but you're missing the mark here big time (or BIGLY as our PEOTUS would say). The Fournette/McCaffrey thing IMO is not very far off of Sherm's rant about why playing on TNF sucks. If you were a 20-21 year old that was essentially a lock to be a millionaire in a manner of months, would you risk that to play in a LITERALLY meaningless game where absolutely nobody will care about this 12 months from now? Hell probably sooner than that in all honesty.

Yeah I am aware they have insurance policies in place, and McCaffrey is a smart enough kid with a decorated education that he'd probably be a-ok in the event he blew his knee and had his career shortened or ended, but there is no reason for him to play in a meaningless game when his position has a finite life span in the NFL. Figure he has IF HE IS LUCKY and plays at the top 10-20% of his position... MAYBE 8-9 years? And of those 8-9, probably 5-6 that will be prime seasons.

Again, it takes one flukey shot to the knee, one flukey shot to the head/neck area, etc. to end his career or injure him to the point where he falls in the draft.

Does this set a precedent? Probably. But this is good. As someone else alluded to, there are way too many bowl games right now that are only in place because ESPN wants to fill a 3 hour block of TV for the next 2 weeks. Make the postseason meaningful, and this won't happen.

I swear, people are so freaking spoiled these days it's utterly mind boggling. Millennials my ass, it's the "little bitch" generation.

As a 'Millennial' myself, I can say we're not spoiled, we're much more aware. There's no bravado to be had playing in the Sun Bowl. I'm sorry, there just isnt.

End of the day these are student athletes attempting to garner a career. This is no different than a college grad taking necessary steps to ensure they're not put in a situation that could jeopardize everything they worked for.

 

[Hasselbeck]

Damn, what has happened to pride and tradition?...Money and greed is the answer. Grow a pair Mc Caffrey.

What a Pussy move, I might get hurt and squander my NFL career...PLEASE. People are asking if he is Seahawky?...NO, he screams Joey Galloway all day.

The PRIDE and TRADITION of the HYUNDAI SUN BOWL! GET HYPED!

This post makes me love C-Mac even more. :lol:

 

[Uncle Si]

Damn, what has happened to pride and tradition?...Money and greed is the answer. Grow a pair Mc Caffrey.

What a Pussy move, I might get hurt and squander my NFL career...PLEASE. People are asking if he is Seahawky?...NO, he screams Joey Galloway all day.

Money and greed is college sports though. Why shouldn't the players be able to play within it?

He is simply playing in the system that was created around him. He's been at Stanford for what, 3 years already. Stanford and the NCAA have made a ton of money with him. No other part of the system has to remain "loyal."

So why are we upset when a 20-22 year old "kid" exercises the same business options that his coach, the school or the ruling organization can elicit at any time? Why are the athletes the only ones with no control in this situation and when they try to help themselves people jump on them?

I understand people are fearful that this may signal a crack that may lead to the rupture of college athletics. But come on... we are cheering for kids who are basically being used to make millions upon millions of dollars and try and pretend as if they should just do it for the sake of "pride, tradition" or even better, "college."

He literally has nothing to gain from playing in this game. He used his skills to put himself in this position. He was used for his skills to make other people lots of money. He now has one opportunity to think about himself. Why shouldn't he?