[Farm93]

Agree. I am in the camp of being disappointed that C-Mac is not playing in the bowl game, but is there anyone who thinks that he would be sitting out if Stanford qualified for the CFP and was scheduled to play Alabama in the semifinal?

Think this is where I net out.
I wish he was playing for the benefit of the program.
I am highly confident CMAC would be playing in any NY6 bowl.
My guess (assumption) is that some part of his lower body injuries would really benefit from a few months without additional contact sport trauma and that no one affiliated with Stanford sees any reason or duty to announce that tidbit to fans.

But even if it is a purely selfish move I am OK with it.  These charity bowl games are now hard to justify given what the NCAA and NFL know about the dangers of the sport.  I can't imagine anyone jumping into a boxing ring to raise a few bucks for a set of small charities, hotels and restaurants in some random town.  Football has a duty to team aspect, but that only goes so far in the world of amateur sports.

I am highly confident a lot of the current athletes claiming they would do X or Y will in the years to come join lawsuits against their alma maters and the NCAA for making them do X or Y leading to CTE or whatever.

[Farm93]

Agree. I am in the camp of being disappointed that C-Mac is not playing in the bowl game, but is there anyone who thinks that he would be sitting out if Stanford qualified for the CFP and was scheduled to play Alabama in the semifinal?

Think this is where I net out.
I wish he was playing for the benefit of the program.
I am highly confident CMAC would be playing in any NY6 bowl.
My guess (assumption) is that some part of his lower body injuries would really benefit from a few months without additional contact sport trauma and that no one affiliated with Stanford sees any reason or duty to announce that tidbit to fans.

But even if it is a purely selfish move I am OK with it.  These charity bowl games are now hard to justify given what the NCAA and NFL know about the dangers of the sport.  I can't imagine anyone jumping into a boxing ring to raise a few bucks for a set of small charities, hotels and restaurants in some random town.  Football has a duty to team aspect, but that only goes so far in the world of amateur sports.

I am highly confident a lot of the current athletes claiming they would do X or Y will in the years to come join lawsuits against their alma maters and the NCAA for making them do X or Y leading to CTE or whatever.

[Farm93]

Agree. I am in the camp of being disappointed that C-Mac is not playing in the bowl game, but is there anyone who thinks that he would be sitting out if Stanford qualified for the CFP and was scheduled to play Alabama in the semifinal?

Think this is where I net out.
I wish he was playing for the benefit of the program.
I am highly confident CMAC would be playing in any NY6 bowl.
My guess (assumption) is that some part of his lower body injuries would really benefit from a few months without additional contact sport trauma and that no one affiliated with Stanford sees any reason or duty to announce that tidbit to fans.

But even if it is a purely selfish move I am OK with it.  These charity bowl games are now hard to justify given what the NCAA and NFL know about the dangers of the sport.  I can't imagine anyone jumping into a boxing ring to raise a few bucks for a set of small charities, hotels and restaurants in some random town.  Football has a duty to team aspect, but that only goes so far in the world of amateur sports.

I am highly confident a lot of the current athletes claiming they would do X or Y will in the years to come join lawsuits against their alma maters and the NCAA for making them do X or Y leading to CTE or whatever.

[Farm93]

Agree. I am in the camp of being disappointed that C-Mac is not playing in the bowl game, but is there anyone who thinks that he would be sitting out if Stanford qualified for the CFP and was scheduled to play Alabama in the semifinal?

Think this is where I net out.
I wish he was playing for the benefit of the program.
I am highly confident CMAC would be playing in any NY6 bowl.
My guess (assumption) is that some part of his lower body injuries would really benefit from a few months without additional contact sport trauma and that no one affiliated with Stanford sees any reason or duty to announce that tidbit to fans.

But even if it is a purely selfish move I am OK with it.  These charity bowl games are now hard to justify given what the NCAA and NFL know about the dangers of the sport.  I can't imagine anyone jumping into a boxing ring to raise a few bucks for a set of small charities, hotels and restaurants in some random town.  Football has a duty to team aspect, but that only goes so far in the world of amateur sports.

I am highly confident a lot of the current athletes claiming they would do X or Y will in the years to come join lawsuits against their alma maters and the NCAA for making them do X or Y leading to CTE or whatever.

[Langdude]

Without stating any position on this, it is interesting that different stances on CM's decision are analogous to different stances on the purpose of going to college.

-m.

[Langdude]

Without stating any position on this, it is interesting that different stances on CM's decision are analogous to different stances on the purpose of going to college.

-m.

[Langdude]

Without stating any position on this, it is interesting that different stances on CM's decision are analogous to different stances on the purpose of going to college.

-m.

[Langdude]

Without stating any position on this, it is interesting that different stances on CM's decision are analogous to different stances on the purpose of going to college.

-m.

[Farm93]

I am running on the assumption that the undisclosed lower body injury that hampered his top end speed for 2/3rds of the season is the real problem here.  And that with real rest he can run a good 40 in the combine, say 4.50-4.55, but if/when the Sun Bowl adds some dings he might risk adding a tenth or even two to his 40 time.

The family likely has a very good understanding of the risk reward equation here and that all that does not need to be disclosed would answer everything here for Stanford types.  I can't help but think that the lower body injury against USC changed EVERYTHING.  Impacted Stanford's season, his season and his outlook on his football future.

As everyone on this board has incomplete information, I will continue to assume that CMAC and his family are making a very prudent decision.  Potentially a touch selfish, but a decision that likely factored that negative selfish perception in prior to announcing the move.

The downside?  No performance against UNC was ever going to be good enough.  No poor performance was going to be bad enough.  NFL scouts really don't care about bowl game results for a player with as much history as CMAC.  The real downside is that with all of this rest CMAC still jumps to the combine and runs a 4.7 40.  If he played in the Sun Bowl he could blame a bad time on some minor strain or sprain.  Now, with ample rest he will need to literally fly because there will be no excuses available.

[Farm93]

I am running on the assumption that the undisclosed lower body injury that hampered his top end speed for 2/3rds of the season is the real problem here.  And that with real rest he can run a good 40 in the combine, say 4.50-4.55, but if/when the Sun Bowl adds some dings he might risk adding a tenth or even two to his 40 time.

The family likely has a very good understanding of the risk reward equation here and that all that does not need to be disclosed would answer everything here for Stanford types.  I can't help but think that the lower body injury against USC changed EVERYTHING.  Impacted Stanford's season, his season and his outlook on his football future.

As everyone on this board has incomplete information, I will continue to assume that CMAC and his family are making a very prudent decision.  Potentially a touch selfish, but a decision that likely factored that negative selfish perception in prior to announcing the move.

The downside?  No performance against UNC was ever going to be good enough.  No poor performance was going to be bad enough.  NFL scouts really don't care about bowl game results for a player with as much history as CMAC.  The real downside is that with all of this rest CMAC still jumps to the combine and runs a 4.7 40.  If he played in the Sun Bowl he could blame a bad time on some minor strain or sprain.  Now, with ample rest he will need to literally fly because there will be no excuses available.

[Farm93]

I am running on the assumption that the undisclosed lower body injury that hampered his top end speed for 2/3rds of the season is the real problem here.  And that with real rest he can run a good 40 in the combine, say 4.50-4.55, but if/when the Sun Bowl adds some dings he might risk adding a tenth or even two to his 40 time.

The family likely has a very good understanding of the risk reward equation here and that all that does not need to be disclosed would answer everything here for Stanford types.  I can't help but think that the lower body injury against USC changed EVERYTHING.  Impacted Stanford's season, his season and his outlook on his football future.

As everyone on this board has incomplete information, I will continue to assume that CMAC and his family are making a very prudent decision.  Potentially a touch selfish, but a decision that likely factored that negative selfish perception in prior to announcing the move.

The downside?  No performance against UNC was ever going to be good enough.  No poor performance was going to be bad enough.  NFL scouts really don't care about bowl game results for a player with as much history as CMAC.  The real downside is that with all of this rest CMAC still jumps to the combine and runs a 4.7 40.  If he played in the Sun Bowl he could blame a bad time on some minor strain or sprain.  Now, with ample rest he will need to literally fly because there will be no excuses available.

[Farm93]

I am running on the assumption that the undisclosed lower body injury that hampered his top end speed for 2/3rds of the season is the real problem here.  And that with real rest he can run a good 40 in the combine, say 4.50-4.55, but if/when the Sun Bowl adds some dings he might risk adding a tenth or even two to his 40 time.

The family likely has a very good understanding of the risk reward equation here and that all that does not need to be disclosed would answer everything here for Stanford types.  I can't help but think that the lower body injury against USC changed EVERYTHING.  Impacted Stanford's season, his season and his outlook on his football future.

As everyone on this board has incomplete information, I will continue to assume that CMAC and his family are making a very prudent decision.  Potentially a touch selfish, but a decision that likely factored that negative selfish perception in prior to announcing the move.

The downside?  No performance against UNC was ever going to be good enough.  No poor performance was going to be bad enough.  NFL scouts really don't care about bowl game results for a player with as much history as CMAC.  The real downside is that with all of this rest CMAC still jumps to the combine and runs a 4.7 40.  If he played in the Sun Bowl he could blame a bad time on some minor strain or sprain.  Now, with ample rest he will need to literally fly because there will be no excuses available.

[Papa John]

Like others have said, there may be mitigating circumstances. What if, between December 7 and this morning, CMac felt a tweak or twinge that was an aftereffect of his midseason injury? Since we don't have all of the facts--and probably never will--I suppose that we should give him the benefit of the doubt.

[Papa John]

Like others have said, there may be mitigating circumstances. What if, between December 7 and this morning, CMac felt a tweak or twinge that was an aftereffect of his midseason injury? Since we don't have all of the facts--and probably never will--I suppose that we should give him the benefit of the doubt.

[Papa John]

Like others have said, there may be mitigating circumstances. What if, between December 7 and this morning, CMac felt a tweak or twinge that was an aftereffect of his midseason injury? Since we don't have all of the facts--and probably never will--I suppose that we should give him the benefit of the doubt.

[Papa John]

Like others have said, there may be mitigating circumstances. What if, between December 7 and this morning, CMac felt a tweak or twinge that was an aftereffect of his midseason injury? Since we don't have all of the facts--and probably never will--I suppose that we should give him the benefit of the doubt.

[CornFed]

Jaylon Smith is a poster boy for those playing the potential injury angle to justify CMac sitting out the Sun Bowl.  It seems to be a legitimate concern.  Smith is said to have lost $20mm as a result of his injury.  But anecdotal stuff is just that.  Our resident statisticians might have access to more generalized information about the risks of various levels of injury and the consequent dollar loss as a result of a player's suffering impairment of their actual draft position.  Regardless, of what those probabilities are, the fact that they can be identified should make the situation insurable.  Doesn't this kind of insurance exist?  Is it prohibitively expensive?  Smith's loss suggests that the potential losses involved warrant paying pretty substantial premiums.  But again, what is the frequency of a player's loss even coming close to that of Smith, who combined super-stardom with a tragically severe injury to suffer a maximum loss?

Where Christian's decision affects me is in my sense of who he is.  Unchanged is my feeling that he is one of the five to ten most gifted and exciting football players I have ever seen at the college level.  My sense of his character is unfazed.  I believe he is honest, trustworthy and probably flosses regularly.  He is clearly very bright, personable and quite articulate and I think he will always represent Stanford in a manner for which I will be truly grateful.

What he is not is even a tiny bit romantic.  Nothing of the essence of his college football experience appeared to come into play in this decision.  It is a calibrated and calculated move.  It reflects an approach that prioritizes optimizing the last dollar of value extracted at the price of irreplaceable memories for both him and us. 

Granted, I am assuming that there is insurance available that could replace most, if not all, of the losses caused by a traumatic injury.  It is all at the margins.  But if insurance were available and his dad could afford to buy it, then the financial downside would be covered.  In that event, his downside would become the loss of the premium paid and any improvement in his draft status derived from being otherwise able to prepare for the combine.  The latter is truly inconsequential and is so small and subjectively assessed as to be effectively zero.  Again, I think all of us agree that, if there is an injury involved that is not being mentioned, we can understand his need to sit out.

If there is no consideration needed for an existing injury, though, I think he is being "penny wise, and pound foolish".  Sometimes we get so caught up in being so analytical and quantitative that we lose focus on the stuff that matters.  I had a friend that loved to ridicule new MBA's obsession with precision by describing them as "arbitrarily exact".  Maximizing the dollars makes him look just like the NCAA and the Bowl sponsors we love to deride for their egregious greed.  And it is only going to get worse at the next level.  The Sun Bowl would have been fun for him.  Doing all the pre-game schtick with his teammates would have been a hoot and and it just won't be the same ever again.  It may be great in the pros.  It may even be greater.  But it will not be his final college game.

[CornFed]

Jaylon Smith is a poster boy for those playing the potential injury angle to justify CMac sitting out the Sun Bowl.  It seems to be a legitimate concern.  Smith is said to have lost $20mm as a result of his injury.  But anecdotal stuff is just that.  Our resident statisticians might have access to more generalized information about the risks of various levels of injury and the consequent dollar loss as a result of a player's suffering impairment of their actual draft position.  Regardless, of what those probabilities are, the fact that they can be identified should make the situation insurable.  Doesn't this kind of insurance exist?  Is it prohibitively expensive?  Smith's loss suggests that the potential losses involved warrant paying pretty substantial premiums.  But again, what is the frequency of a player's loss even coming close to that of Smith, who combined super-stardom with a tragically severe injury to suffer a maximum loss?

Where Christian's decision affects me is in my sense of who he is.  Unchanged is my feeling that he is one of the five to ten most gifted and exciting football players I have ever seen at the college level.  My sense of his character is unfazed.  I believe he is honest, trustworthy and probably flosses regularly.  He is clearly very bright, personable and quite articulate and I think he will always represent Stanford in a manner for which I will be truly grateful.

What he is not is even a tiny bit romantic.  Nothing of the essence of his college football experience appeared to come into play in this decision.  It is a calibrated and calculated move.  It reflects an approach that prioritizes optimizing the last dollar of value extracted at the price of irreplaceable memories for both him and us. 

Granted, I am assuming that there is insurance available that could replace most, if not all, of the losses caused by a traumatic injury.  It is all at the margins.  But if insurance were available and his dad could afford to buy it, then the financial downside would be covered.  In that event, his downside would become the loss of the premium paid and any improvement in his draft status derived from being otherwise able to prepare for the combine.  The latter is truly inconsequential and is so small and subjectively assessed as to be effectively zero.  Again, I think all of us agree that, if there is an injury involved that is not being mentioned, we can understand his need to sit out.

If there is no consideration needed for an existing injury, though, I think he is being "penny wise, and pound foolish".  Sometimes we get so caught up in being so analytical and quantitative that we lose focus on the stuff that matters.  I had a friend that loved to ridicule new MBA's obsession with precision by describing them as "arbitrarily exact".  Maximizing the dollars makes him look just like the NCAA and the Bowl sponsors we love to deride for their egregious greed.  And it is only going to get worse at the next level.  The Sun Bowl would have been fun for him.  Doing all the pre-game schtick with his teammates would have been a hoot and and it just won't be the same ever again.  It may be great in the pros.  It may even be greater.  But it will not be his final college game.

[CornFed]

Jaylon Smith is a poster boy for those playing the potential injury angle to justify CMac sitting out the Sun Bowl.  It seems to be a legitimate concern.  Smith is said to have lost $20mm as a result of his injury.  But anecdotal stuff is just that.  Our resident statisticians might have access to more generalized information about the risks of various levels of injury and the consequent dollar loss as a result of a player's suffering impairment of their actual draft position.  Regardless, of what those probabilities are, the fact that they can be identified should make the situation insurable.  Doesn't this kind of insurance exist?  Is it prohibitively expensive?  Smith's loss suggests that the potential losses involved warrant paying pretty substantial premiums.  But again, what is the frequency of a player's loss even coming close to that of Smith, who combined super-stardom with a tragically severe injury to suffer a maximum loss?

Where Christian's decision affects me is in my sense of who he is.  Unchanged is my feeling that he is one of the five to ten most gifted and exciting football players I have ever seen at the college level.  My sense of his character is unfazed.  I believe he is honest, trustworthy and probably flosses regularly.  He is clearly very bright, personable and quite articulate and I think he will always represent Stanford in a manner for which I will be truly grateful.

What he is not is even a tiny bit romantic.  Nothing of the essence of his college football experience appeared to come into play in this decision.  It is a calibrated and calculated move.  It reflects an approach that prioritizes optimizing the last dollar of value extracted at the price of irreplaceable memories for both him and us. 

Granted, I am assuming that there is insurance available that could replace most, if not all, of the losses caused by a traumatic injury.  It is all at the margins.  But if insurance were available and his dad could afford to buy it, then the financial downside would be covered.  In that event, his downside would become the loss of the premium paid and any improvement in his draft status derived from being otherwise able to prepare for the combine.  The latter is truly inconsequential and is so small and subjectively assessed as to be effectively zero.  Again, I think all of us agree that, if there is an injury involved that is not being mentioned, we can understand his need to sit out.

If there is no consideration needed for an existing injury, though, I think he is being "penny wise, and pound foolish".  Sometimes we get so caught up in being so analytical and quantitative that we lose focus on the stuff that matters.  I had a friend that loved to ridicule new MBA's obsession with precision by describing them as "arbitrarily exact".  Maximizing the dollars makes him look just like the NCAA and the Bowl sponsors we love to deride for their egregious greed.  And it is only going to get worse at the next level.  The Sun Bowl would have been fun for him.  Doing all the pre-game schtick with his teammates would have been a hoot and and it just won't be the same ever again.  It may be great in the pros.  It may even be greater.  But it will not be his final college game.

[CornFed]

Jaylon Smith is a poster boy for those playing the potential injury angle to justify CMac sitting out the Sun Bowl.  It seems to be a legitimate concern.  Smith is said to have lost $20mm as a result of his injury.  But anecdotal stuff is just that.  Our resident statisticians might have access to more generalized information about the risks of various levels of injury and the consequent dollar loss as a result of a player's suffering impairment of their actual draft position.  Regardless, of what those probabilities are, the fact that they can be identified should make the situation insurable.  Doesn't this kind of insurance exist?  Is it prohibitively expensive?  Smith's loss suggests that the potential losses involved warrant paying pretty substantial premiums.  But again, what is the frequency of a player's loss even coming close to that of Smith, who combined super-stardom with a tragically severe injury to suffer a maximum loss?

Where Christian's decision affects me is in my sense of who he is.  Unchanged is my feeling that he is one of the five to ten most gifted and exciting football players I have ever seen at the college level.  My sense of his character is unfazed.  I believe he is honest, trustworthy and probably flosses regularly.  He is clearly very bright, personable and quite articulate and I think he will always represent Stanford in a manner for which I will be truly grateful.

What he is not is even a tiny bit romantic.  Nothing of the essence of his college football experience appeared to come into play in this decision.  It is a calibrated and calculated move.  It reflects an approach that prioritizes optimizing the last dollar of value extracted at the price of irreplaceable memories for both him and us. 

Granted, I am assuming that there is insurance available that could replace most, if not all, of the losses caused by a traumatic injury.  It is all at the margins.  But if insurance were available and his dad could afford to buy it, then the financial downside would be covered.  In that event, his downside would become the loss of the premium paid and any improvement in his draft status derived from being otherwise able to prepare for the combine.  The latter is truly inconsequential and is so small and subjectively assessed as to be effectively zero.  Again, I think all of us agree that, if there is an injury involved that is not being mentioned, we can understand his need to sit out.

If there is no consideration needed for an existing injury, though, I think he is being "penny wise, and pound foolish".  Sometimes we get so caught up in being so analytical and quantitative that we lose focus on the stuff that matters.  I had a friend that loved to ridicule new MBA's obsession with precision by describing them as "arbitrarily exact".  Maximizing the dollars makes him look just like the NCAA and the Bowl sponsors we love to deride for their egregious greed.  And it is only going to get worse at the next level.  The Sun Bowl would have been fun for him.  Doing all the pre-game schtick with his teammates would have been a hoot and and it just won't be the same ever again.  It may be great in the pros.  It may even be greater.  But it will not be his final college game.

[teejers1]

So VFRing, DC and others, I'm trying to get a handle on where you draw the line, so to speak, if at all on playing vs. not playing.

1.  do you support CM's decision because it is a rational one and players should be empowered; thus, whatever he decides vis a vis playing or not playing (at any point this season), is fine with you?

2.  would you support CM sitting out the Sun Bowl, but not a national semifinal?

3.  would you support CM sitting out the Sun Bowl, but not a NY6 Bowl?

4.  Alamo?  Holiday?

5.  If McCaffrey decided after Game 6 of this season that "I've shown enough for the NFL, so I'm going to sit out the rest of the way to maximize my NFL potential," would you have supported that?

It strikes me that you can be "all in on CMac's decision, whatever it is."  But after that, the "principle" behind the decision is completely eviscerated.  If the concern is avoiding injury and maximizing prep for NFL Combine - which is apparently what it is - then it's arguable that the Bigger Bowls (against better/more ferocious teams) present a higher risk of damaging NFL prospects.

And then, of course, there is bailing on your teammates and coaches before the season is over.

[teejers1]

So VFRing, DC and others, I'm trying to get a handle on where you draw the line, so to speak, if at all on playing vs. not playing.

1.  do you support CM's decision because it is a rational one and players should be empowered; thus, whatever he decides vis a vis playing or not playing (at any point this season), is fine with you?

2.  would you support CM sitting out the Sun Bowl, but not a national semifinal?

3.  would you support CM sitting out the Sun Bowl, but not a NY6 Bowl?

4.  Alamo?  Holiday?

5.  If McCaffrey decided after Game 6 of this season that "I've shown enough for the NFL, so I'm going to sit out the rest of the way to maximize my NFL potential," would you have supported that?

It strikes me that you can be "all in on CMac's decision, whatever it is."  But after that, the "principle" behind the decision is completely eviscerated.  If the concern is avoiding injury and maximizing prep for NFL Combine - which is apparently what it is - then it's arguable that the Bigger Bowls (against better/more ferocious teams) present a higher risk of damaging NFL prospects.

And then, of course, there is bailing on your teammates and coaches before the season is over.

[teejers1]

So VFRing, DC and others, I'm trying to get a handle on where you draw the line, so to speak, if at all on playing vs. not playing.

1.  do you support CM's decision because it is a rational one and players should be empowered; thus, whatever he decides vis a vis playing or not playing (at any point this season), is fine with you?

2.  would you support CM sitting out the Sun Bowl, but not a national semifinal?

3.  would you support CM sitting out the Sun Bowl, but not a NY6 Bowl?

4.  Alamo?  Holiday?

5.  If McCaffrey decided after Game 6 of this season that "I've shown enough for the NFL, so I'm going to sit out the rest of the way to maximize my NFL potential," would you have supported that?

It strikes me that you can be "all in on CMac's decision, whatever it is."  But after that, the "principle" behind the decision is completely eviscerated.  If the concern is avoiding injury and maximizing prep for NFL Combine - which is apparently what it is - then it's arguable that the Bigger Bowls (against better/more ferocious teams) present a higher risk of damaging NFL prospects.

And then, of course, there is bailing on your teammates and coaches before the season is over.

[teejers1]

So VFRing, DC and others, I'm trying to get a handle on where you draw the line, so to speak, if at all on playing vs. not playing.

1.  do you support CM's decision because it is a rational one and players should be empowered; thus, whatever he decides vis a vis playing or not playing (at any point this season), is fine with you?

2.  would you support CM sitting out the Sun Bowl, but not a national semifinal?

3.  would you support CM sitting out the Sun Bowl, but not a NY6 Bowl?

4.  Alamo?  Holiday?

5.  If McCaffrey decided after Game 6 of this season that "I've shown enough for the NFL, so I'm going to sit out the rest of the way to maximize my NFL potential," would you have supported that?

It strikes me that you can be "all in on CMac's decision, whatever it is."  But after that, the "principle" behind the decision is completely eviscerated.  If the concern is avoiding injury and maximizing prep for NFL Combine - which is apparently what it is - then it's arguable that the Bigger Bowls (against better/more ferocious teams) present a higher risk of damaging NFL prospects.

And then, of course, there is bailing on your teammates and coaches before the season is over.

[Goose]

Some posts indicate they are "disappointed" in CMac for deciding not to play in the next game, but that it is ok with them that he decided to not play in the 12 (minimum) games next year. That seems a bit contradictory to me. The idea that he is "letting down his teammates" assumes they actually want him to play. Maybe they don't. It could be that all parties involved have agreed it is better for the team and for CMac that he does NOT play. He doesn't get hurt, BLove and others get more reps, the line learns how to pass block better, etc. I expect that if Shaw felt that he really needed him, he would be available, i.e. if it was a NY6 bowl. I don't know this is true, but I also don't know that it isn't. This setup does possibly look like a win-win for everybody but perhaps the fans.

[Goose]

Some posts indicate they are "disappointed" in CMac for deciding not to play in the next game, but that it is ok with them that he decided to not play in the 12 (minimum) games next year. That seems a bit contradictory to me. The idea that he is "letting down his teammates" assumes they actually want him to play. Maybe they don't. It could be that all parties involved have agreed it is better for the team and for CMac that he does NOT play. He doesn't get hurt, BLove and others get more reps, the line learns how to pass block better, etc. I expect that if Shaw felt that he really needed him, he would be available, i.e. if it was a NY6 bowl. I don't know this is true, but I also don't know that it isn't. This setup does possibly look like a win-win for everybody but perhaps the fans.

[Goose]

Some posts indicate they are "disappointed" in CMac for deciding not to play in the next game, but that it is ok with them that he decided to not play in the 12 (minimum) games next year. That seems a bit contradictory to me. The idea that he is "letting down his teammates" assumes they actually want him to play. Maybe they don't. It could be that all parties involved have agreed it is better for the team and for CMac that he does NOT play. He doesn't get hurt, BLove and others get more reps, the line learns how to pass block better, etc. I expect that if Shaw felt that he really needed him, he would be available, i.e. if it was a NY6 bowl. I don't know this is true, but I also don't know that it isn't. This setup does possibly look like a win-win for everybody but perhaps the fans.

[Goose]

Some posts indicate they are "disappointed" in CMac for deciding not to play in the next game, but that it is ok with them that he decided to not play in the 12 (minimum) games next year. That seems a bit contradictory to me. The idea that he is "letting down his teammates" assumes they actually want him to play. Maybe they don't. It could be that all parties involved have agreed it is better for the team and for CMac that he does NOT play. He doesn't get hurt, BLove and others get more reps, the line learns how to pass block better, etc. I expect that if Shaw felt that he really needed him, he would be available, i.e. if it was a NY6 bowl. I don't know this is true, but I also don't know that it isn't. This setup does possibly look like a win-win for everybody but perhaps the fans.

[needle]

Enjoying the discussion (if not the circumstance).

1. We do not know what went into this decision. On face value, no injury. But after Rice the statement implied he was going to play. Maybe something changed. Maybe it was an injury but feel free to let your imagination run wild. I choose to believe he was encouraged by someone (likely an agent) to sit out the bowl game.

2. His teammates are publicly supporting him. No, we will never know for sure how each player/coach feels, but if the decision was widely unpopular I think teammates would be silent.

3. I have zero doubt that C-Mac played at less than 100% in games between USC and Notre Dame. All players with NFL dreams put their livelihood on the line for their university when they suit up, and Christian proved he was willing to do so even at less than full strength. Please remember this.

4. I conclude that the Sun Bowl does not matter much to the players. There are many factors that go into this decision, some perhaps unrevealed at this time  but I believe one of them is the relative importance of the game. With no player backlash that I see, I think it's obvious that the team does not see this as that big of a game.

5. College football is unique. The risk of injury is so great. If that's the major factor in this decision, how can any fan justifiably criticize C-Mac for taking control of his own welfare and putting himself in optimal position for the next stage of his life?

[needle]

Enjoying the discussion (if not the circumstance).

1. We do not know what went into this decision. On face value, no injury. But after Rice the statement implied he was going to play. Maybe something changed. Maybe it was an injury but feel free to let your imagination run wild. I choose to believe he was encouraged by someone (likely an agent) to sit out the bowl game.

2. His teammates are publicly supporting him. No, we will never know for sure how each player/coach feels, but if the decision was widely unpopular I think teammates would be silent.

3. I have zero doubt that C-Mac played at less than 100% in games between USC and Notre Dame. All players with NFL dreams put their livelihood on the line for their university when they suit up, and Christian proved he was willing to do so even at less than full strength. Please remember this.

4. I conclude that the Sun Bowl does not matter much to the players. There are many factors that go into this decision, some perhaps unrevealed at this time  but I believe one of them is the relative importance of the game. With no player backlash that I see, I think it's obvious that the team does not see this as that big of a game.

5. College football is unique. The risk of injury is so great. If that's the major factor in this decision, how can any fan justifiably criticize C-Mac for taking control of his own welfare and putting himself in optimal position for the next stage of his life?

[needle]

Enjoying the discussion (if not the circumstance).

1. We do not know what went into this decision. On face value, no injury. But after Rice the statement implied he was going to play. Maybe something changed. Maybe it was an injury but feel free to let your imagination run wild. I choose to believe he was encouraged by someone (likely an agent) to sit out the bowl game.

2. His teammates are publicly supporting him. No, we will never know for sure how each player/coach feels, but if the decision was widely unpopular I think teammates would be silent.

3. I have zero doubt that C-Mac played at less than 100% in games between USC and Notre Dame. All players with NFL dreams put their livelihood on the line for their university when they suit up, and Christian proved he was willing to do so even at less than full strength. Please remember this.

4. I conclude that the Sun Bowl does not matter much to the players. There are many factors that go into this decision, some perhaps unrevealed at this time  but I believe one of them is the relative importance of the game. With no player backlash that I see, I think it's obvious that the team does not see this as that big of a game.

5. College football is unique. The risk of injury is so great. If that's the major factor in this decision, how can any fan justifiably criticize C-Mac for taking control of his own welfare and putting himself in optimal position for the next stage of his life?

[needle]

Enjoying the discussion (if not the circumstance).

1. We do not know what went into this decision. On face value, no injury. But after Rice the statement implied he was going to play. Maybe something changed. Maybe it was an injury but feel free to let your imagination run wild. I choose to believe he was encouraged by someone (likely an agent) to sit out the bowl game.

2. His teammates are publicly supporting him. No, we will never know for sure how each player/coach feels, but if the decision was widely unpopular I think teammates would be silent.

3. I have zero doubt that C-Mac played at less than 100% in games between USC and Notre Dame. All players with NFL dreams put their livelihood on the line for their university when they suit up, and Christian proved he was willing to do so even at less than full strength. Please remember this.

4. I conclude that the Sun Bowl does not matter much to the players. There are many factors that go into this decision, some perhaps unrevealed at this time  but I believe one of them is the relative importance of the game. With no player backlash that I see, I think it's obvious that the team does not see this as that big of a game.

5. College football is unique. The risk of injury is so great. If that's the major factor in this decision, how can any fan justifiably criticize C-Mac for taking control of his own welfare and putting himself in optimal position for the next stage of his life?

[DC 86]

So VFRing, DC and others, I'm trying to get a handle on where you draw the line, so to speak, if at all on playing vs. not playing.

Since I was specifically called out ...
I'm not sure why you have placed me in this camp. I have posted that vis a vis the NFL I am pretty sure he gains nothing by playing and assumes some downside risk due to possible injury. That's an opinion based on fact, not a moral or ethical judgment.
If I was his teammate I would want him to play. If I was him (quite a stretch, obviously) I believe that I would play, but I have made many decisions in my life that were guided by emotion as opposed to being rational.

[DC 86]

So VFRing, DC and others, I'm trying to get a handle on where you draw the line, so to speak, if at all on playing vs. not playing.

Since I was specifically called out ...
I'm not sure why you have placed me in this camp. I have posted that vis a vis the NFL I am pretty sure he gains nothing by playing and assumes some downside risk due to possible injury. That's an opinion based on fact, not a moral or ethical judgment.
If I was his teammate I would want him to play. If I was him (quite a stretch, obviously) I believe that I would play, but I have made many decisions in my life that were guided by emotion as opposed to being rational.

[DC 86]

So VFRing, DC and others, I'm trying to get a handle on where you draw the line, so to speak, if at all on playing vs. not playing.

Since I was specifically called out ...
I'm not sure why you have placed me in this camp. I have posted that vis a vis the NFL I am pretty sure he gains nothing by playing and assumes some downside risk due to possible injury. That's an opinion based on fact, not a moral or ethical judgment.
If I was his teammate I would want him to play. If I was him (quite a stretch, obviously) I believe that I would play, but I have made many decisions in my life that were guided by emotion as opposed to being rational.

[DC 86]

So VFRing, DC and others, I'm trying to get a handle on where you draw the line, so to speak, if at all on playing vs. not playing.

Since I was specifically called out ...
I'm not sure why you have placed me in this camp. I have posted that vis a vis the NFL I am pretty sure he gains nothing by playing and assumes some downside risk due to possible injury. That's an opinion based on fact, not a moral or ethical judgment.
If I was his teammate I would want him to play. If I was him (quite a stretch, obviously) I believe that I would play, but I have made many decisions in my life that were guided by emotion as opposed to being rational.

[TreesAndBirds]

Jaylon Smith is a poster boy for those playing the potential injury angle to justify CMac sitting out the Sun Bowl.  It seems to be a legitimate concern.  Smith is said to have lost $20mm as a result of his injury.  But anecdotal stuff is just that.  Our resident statisticians might have access to more generalized information about the risks of various levels of injury and the consequent dollar loss as a result of a player's suffering impairment of their actual draft position.  Regardless, of what those probabilities are, the fact that they can be identified should make the situation insurable.  Doesn't this kind of insurance exist?  Is it prohibitively expensive?  Smith's loss suggests that the potential losses involved warrant paying pretty substantial premiums.  But again, what is the frequency of a player's loss even coming close to that of Smith, who combined super-stardom with a tragically severe injury to suffer a maximum loss?

Where Christian's decision affects me is in my sense of who he is.  Unchanged is my feeling that he is one of the five to ten most gifted and exciting football players I have ever seen at the college level.  My sense of his character is unfazed.  I believe he is honest, trustworthy and probably flosses regularly.  He is clearly very bright, personable and quite articulate and I think he will always represent Stanford in a manner for which I will be truly grateful.

What he is not is even a tiny bit romantic.  Nothing of the essence of his college football experience appeared to come into play in this decision.  It is a calibrated and calculated move.  It reflects an approach that prioritizes optimizing the last dollar of value extracted at the price of irreplaceable memories for both him and us. 

Granted, I am assuming that there is insurance available that could replace most, if not all, of the losses caused by a traumatic injury.  It is all at the margins.  But if insurance were available and his dad could afford to buy it, then the financial downside would be covered.  In that event, his downside would become the loss of the premium paid and any improvement in his draft status derived from being otherwise able to prepare for the combine.  The latter is truly inconsequential and is so small and subjectively assessed as to be effectively zero.  Again, I think all of us agree that, if there is an injury involved that is not being mentioned, we can understand his need to sit out.

If there is no consideration needed for an existing injury, though, I think he is being "penny wise, and pound foolish".  Sometimes we get so caught up in being so analytical and quantitative that we lose focus on the stuff that matters.  I had a friend that loved to ridicule new MBA's obsession with precision by describing them as "arbitrarily exact".  Maximizing the dollars makes him look just like the NCAA and the Bowl sponsors we love to deride for their egregious greed.  And it is only going to get worse at the next level.  The Sun Bowl would have been fun for him.  Doing all the pre-game schtick with his teammates would have been a hoot and and it just won't be the same ever again.  It may be great in the pros.  It may even be greater.  But it will not be his final college game.

I think I read that CM had $5M insurance for an injury that resulted in him not being drafted. $3M if injury significantly reduced his draft position. Dont remember where I read it so maybe I am mis-remembering or am flat out wrong.

[TreesAndBirds]

Jaylon Smith is a poster boy for those playing the potential injury angle to justify CMac sitting out the Sun Bowl.  It seems to be a legitimate concern.  Smith is said to have lost $20mm as a result of his injury.  But anecdotal stuff is just that.  Our resident statisticians might have access to more generalized information about the risks of various levels of injury and the consequent dollar loss as a result of a player's suffering impairment of their actual draft position.  Regardless, of what those probabilities are, the fact that they can be identified should make the situation insurable.  Doesn't this kind of insurance exist?  Is it prohibitively expensive?  Smith's loss suggests that the potential losses involved warrant paying pretty substantial premiums.  But again, what is the frequency of a player's loss even coming close to that of Smith, who combined super-stardom with a tragically severe injury to suffer a maximum loss?

Where Christian's decision affects me is in my sense of who he is.  Unchanged is my feeling that he is one of the five to ten most gifted and exciting football players I have ever seen at the college level.  My sense of his character is unfazed.  I believe he is honest, trustworthy and probably flosses regularly.  He is clearly very bright, personable and quite articulate and I think he will always represent Stanford in a manner for which I will be truly grateful.

What he is not is even a tiny bit romantic.  Nothing of the essence of his college football experience appeared to come into play in this decision.  It is a calibrated and calculated move.  It reflects an approach that prioritizes optimizing the last dollar of value extracted at the price of irreplaceable memories for both him and us. 

Granted, I am assuming that there is insurance available that could replace most, if not all, of the losses caused by a traumatic injury.  It is all at the margins.  But if insurance were available and his dad could afford to buy it, then the financial downside would be covered.  In that event, his downside would become the loss of the premium paid and any improvement in his draft status derived from being otherwise able to prepare for the combine.  The latter is truly inconsequential and is so small and subjectively assessed as to be effectively zero.  Again, I think all of us agree that, if there is an injury involved that is not being mentioned, we can understand his need to sit out.

If there is no consideration needed for an existing injury, though, I think he is being "penny wise, and pound foolish".  Sometimes we get so caught up in being so analytical and quantitative that we lose focus on the stuff that matters.  I had a friend that loved to ridicule new MBA's obsession with precision by describing them as "arbitrarily exact".  Maximizing the dollars makes him look just like the NCAA and the Bowl sponsors we love to deride for their egregious greed.  And it is only going to get worse at the next level.  The Sun Bowl would have been fun for him.  Doing all the pre-game schtick with his teammates would have been a hoot and and it just won't be the same ever again.  It may be great in the pros.  It may even be greater.  But it will not be his final college game.

I think I read that CM had $5M insurance for an injury that resulted in him not being drafted. $3M if injury significantly reduced his draft position. Dont remember where I read it so maybe I am mis-remembering or am flat out wrong.

[TreesAndBirds]

Jaylon Smith is a poster boy for those playing the potential injury angle to justify CMac sitting out the Sun Bowl.  It seems to be a legitimate concern.  Smith is said to have lost $20mm as a result of his injury.  But anecdotal stuff is just that.  Our resident statisticians might have access to more generalized information about the risks of various levels of injury and the consequent dollar loss as a result of a player's suffering impairment of their actual draft position.  Regardless, of what those probabilities are, the fact that they can be identified should make the situation insurable.  Doesn't this kind of insurance exist?  Is it prohibitively expensive?  Smith's loss suggests that the potential losses involved warrant paying pretty substantial premiums.  But again, what is the frequency of a player's loss even coming close to that of Smith, who combined super-stardom with a tragically severe injury to suffer a maximum loss?

Where Christian's decision affects me is in my sense of who he is.  Unchanged is my feeling that he is one of the five to ten most gifted and exciting football players I have ever seen at the college level.  My sense of his character is unfazed.  I believe he is honest, trustworthy and probably flosses regularly.  He is clearly very bright, personable and quite articulate and I think he will always represent Stanford in a manner for which I will be truly grateful.

What he is not is even a tiny bit romantic.  Nothing of the essence of his college football experience appeared to come into play in this decision.  It is a calibrated and calculated move.  It reflects an approach that prioritizes optimizing the last dollar of value extracted at the price of irreplaceable memories for both him and us. 

Granted, I am assuming that there is insurance available that could replace most, if not all, of the losses caused by a traumatic injury.  It is all at the margins.  But if insurance were available and his dad could afford to buy it, then the financial downside would be covered.  In that event, his downside would become the loss of the premium paid and any improvement in his draft status derived from being otherwise able to prepare for the combine.  The latter is truly inconsequential and is so small and subjectively assessed as to be effectively zero.  Again, I think all of us agree that, if there is an injury involved that is not being mentioned, we can understand his need to sit out.

If there is no consideration needed for an existing injury, though, I think he is being "penny wise, and pound foolish".  Sometimes we get so caught up in being so analytical and quantitative that we lose focus on the stuff that matters.  I had a friend that loved to ridicule new MBA's obsession with precision by describing them as "arbitrarily exact".  Maximizing the dollars makes him look just like the NCAA and the Bowl sponsors we love to deride for their egregious greed.  And it is only going to get worse at the next level.  The Sun Bowl would have been fun for him.  Doing all the pre-game schtick with his teammates would have been a hoot and and it just won't be the same ever again.  It may be great in the pros.  It may even be greater.  But it will not be his final college game.

I think I read that CM had $5M insurance for an injury that resulted in him not being drafted. $3M if injury significantly reduced his draft position. Dont remember where I read it so maybe I am mis-remembering or am flat out wrong.

[TreesAndBirds]

Jaylon Smith is a poster boy for those playing the potential injury angle to justify CMac sitting out the Sun Bowl.  It seems to be a legitimate concern.  Smith is said to have lost $20mm as a result of his injury.  But anecdotal stuff is just that.  Our resident statisticians might have access to more generalized information about the risks of various levels of injury and the consequent dollar loss as a result of a player's suffering impairment of their actual draft position.  Regardless, of what those probabilities are, the fact that they can be identified should make the situation insurable.  Doesn't this kind of insurance exist?  Is it prohibitively expensive?  Smith's loss suggests that the potential losses involved warrant paying pretty substantial premiums.  But again, what is the frequency of a player's loss even coming close to that of Smith, who combined super-stardom with a tragically severe injury to suffer a maximum loss?

Where Christian's decision affects me is in my sense of who he is.  Unchanged is my feeling that he is one of the five to ten most gifted and exciting football players I have ever seen at the college level.  My sense of his character is unfazed.  I believe he is honest, trustworthy and probably flosses regularly.  He is clearly very bright, personable and quite articulate and I think he will always represent Stanford in a manner for which I will be truly grateful.

What he is not is even a tiny bit romantic.  Nothing of the essence of his college football experience appeared to come into play in this decision.  It is a calibrated and calculated move.  It reflects an approach that prioritizes optimizing the last dollar of value extracted at the price of irreplaceable memories for both him and us. 

Granted, I am assuming that there is insurance available that could replace most, if not all, of the losses caused by a traumatic injury.  It is all at the margins.  But if insurance were available and his dad could afford to buy it, then the financial downside would be covered.  In that event, his downside would become the loss of the premium paid and any improvement in his draft status derived from being otherwise able to prepare for the combine.  The latter is truly inconsequential and is so small and subjectively assessed as to be effectively zero.  Again, I think all of us agree that, if there is an injury involved that is not being mentioned, we can understand his need to sit out.

If there is no consideration needed for an existing injury, though, I think he is being "penny wise, and pound foolish".  Sometimes we get so caught up in being so analytical and quantitative that we lose focus on the stuff that matters.  I had a friend that loved to ridicule new MBA's obsession with precision by describing them as "arbitrarily exact".  Maximizing the dollars makes him look just like the NCAA and the Bowl sponsors we love to deride for their egregious greed.  And it is only going to get worse at the next level.  The Sun Bowl would have been fun for him.  Doing all the pre-game schtick with his teammates would have been a hoot and and it just won't be the same ever again.  It may be great in the pros.  It may even be greater.  But it will not be his final college game.

I think I read that CM had $5M insurance for an injury that resulted in him not being drafted. $3M if injury significantly reduced his draft position. Dont remember where I read it so maybe I am mis-remembering or am flat out wrong.