[martyup]

I think we have reached the point of:

[martyup]

I think we have reached the point of:

[martyup]

I think we have reached the point of:

[martyup]

I think we have reached the point of:

[BostonCard]

I saw an interesting quote from Nick Saban who suggested that the decisions not to play in bowl games (Fournette, McCaffrey, and others) were directly related to the college football playoff.  I didn't get to watch the entire segment, but I could see the logic.  Players with an NFL future will obviously continue to play for their team in the playoffs, but for regular old bowl games the desire to play will be balanced against the risk of injury, etc.  The more the playoffs are emphasized, the more bowl games will be de-emphasized and the decision to play or not will be much like college all star games, balancing an opportunity to impress scouts against the risk of injury and a chance to devote full time to preparing for the draft.

Unexpected consequences.

BC

[BostonCard]

I saw an interesting quote from Nick Saban who suggested that the decisions not to play in bowl games (Fournette, McCaffrey, and others) were directly related to the college football playoff.  I didn't get to watch the entire segment, but I could see the logic.  Players with an NFL future will obviously continue to play for their team in the playoffs, but for regular old bowl games the desire to play will be balanced against the risk of injury, etc.  The more the playoffs are emphasized, the more bowl games will be de-emphasized and the decision to play or not will be much like college all star games, balancing an opportunity to impress scouts against the risk of injury and a chance to devote full time to preparing for the draft.

Unexpected consequences.

BC

[BostonCard]

I saw an interesting quote from Nick Saban who suggested that the decisions not to play in bowl games (Fournette, McCaffrey, and others) were directly related to the college football playoff.  I didn't get to watch the entire segment, but I could see the logic.  Players with an NFL future will obviously continue to play for their team in the playoffs, but for regular old bowl games the desire to play will be balanced against the risk of injury, etc.  The more the playoffs are emphasized, the more bowl games will be de-emphasized and the decision to play or not will be much like college all star games, balancing an opportunity to impress scouts against the risk of injury and a chance to devote full time to preparing for the draft.

Unexpected consequences.

BC

[BostonCard]

I saw an interesting quote from Nick Saban who suggested that the decisions not to play in bowl games (Fournette, McCaffrey, and others) were directly related to the college football playoff.  I didn't get to watch the entire segment, but I could see the logic.  Players with an NFL future will obviously continue to play for their team in the playoffs, but for regular old bowl games the desire to play will be balanced against the risk of injury, etc.  The more the playoffs are emphasized, the more bowl games will be de-emphasized and the decision to play or not will be much like college all star games, balancing an opportunity to impress scouts against the risk of injury and a chance to devote full time to preparing for the draft.

Unexpected consequences.

BC

[jacketree]

Please Martyup; in my format we're only at 19 pages. This (presumably healthy bowl scratch) has never happened before.  I think we may get to rendered glue stage before we completely wear out.

Really good comments on "both sides".  I don't think it is one or the other.  If he was really injured, he wouldn't be playing and would say so, watching in street clothes. (Can't hide actual injuries from the NFL.) If he's still sore/dinged/battered like many/most CFB players at the end of a season, he could certainly go and play well, but why not add a month to body recovery prior to really ramping it up for the combine? He'll prep better and run better if any nagging whatever is fully healed.  I think that is his honest position - I'm going to prep for the draft.  What is unsaid may be what Goose alludes to: "Yeah, I'm kind of done with you guys."  This is why we provide severance packages for people who quit at work (and don't have crazy important roles for crazy important projects - geeze not like that didn't happen twice this month), rather than letting them play out the string in front of everyone left behind to clean up the mess without that exciting alternate future.  CMAC didn't leave a mess by any means, but maybe he was just ready to move on and the Sun Bowl; rather than say a National Semi against Bama; isn't enough of an enticement to endure the dings that will slow down his prep. Or the chance of something worse of course.  But a football player can't tweet: "Skipping the Sun Bowl because I'm afraid I might get hurt."

Makes total sense.  I still hearken back to playground stuff where if you start something, you finish it. Multi millions weren't riding on it, but last year my son and his 1/C teammates at Navy all dealt with the issue of playing through injuries that might threaten their future commission just to get Army one last time.  My son played on a bum leg all season, which finally gave way about 20 seconds before halftime at West Point.  He did commission and recently received a perfect sore on his PRT despite single-digit temperatures.  Next decision: to snowboard or not while in California for a week.... A couple of his mates weren't as lucky.  One in particular required two shoulder surgeries.  It's not clear if he will be able to complete his qualification as a Navy SEAL.  He's in physical limbo indefinitely.  But he didn't give up the ship.

[jacketree]

Please Martyup; in my format we're only at 19 pages. This (presumably healthy bowl scratch) has never happened before.  I think we may get to rendered glue stage before we completely wear out.

Really good comments on "both sides".  I don't think it is one or the other.  If he was really injured, he wouldn't be playing and would say so, watching in street clothes. (Can't hide actual injuries from the NFL.) If he's still sore/dinged/battered like many/most CFB players at the end of a season, he could certainly go and play well, but why not add a month to body recovery prior to really ramping it up for the combine? He'll prep better and run better if any nagging whatever is fully healed.  I think that is his honest position - I'm going to prep for the draft.  What is unsaid may be what Goose alludes to: "Yeah, I'm kind of done with you guys."  This is why we provide severance packages for people who quit at work (and don't have crazy important roles for crazy important projects - geeze not like that didn't happen twice this month), rather than letting them play out the string in front of everyone left behind to clean up the mess without that exciting alternate future.  CMAC didn't leave a mess by any means, but maybe he was just ready to move on and the Sun Bowl; rather than say a National Semi against Bama; isn't enough of an enticement to endure the dings that will slow down his prep. Or the chance of something worse of course.  But a football player can't tweet: "Skipping the Sun Bowl because I'm afraid I might get hurt."

Makes total sense.  I still hearken back to playground stuff where if you start something, you finish it. Multi millions weren't riding on it, but last year my son and his 1/C teammates at Navy all dealt with the issue of playing through injuries that might threaten their future commission just to get Army one last time.  My son played on a bum leg all season, which finally gave way about 20 seconds before halftime at West Point.  He did commission and recently received a perfect sore on his PRT despite single-digit temperatures.  Next decision: to snowboard or not while in California for a week.... A couple of his mates weren't as lucky.  One in particular required two shoulder surgeries.  It's not clear if he will be able to complete his qualification as a Navy SEAL.  He's in physical limbo indefinitely.  But he didn't give up the ship.

[jacketree]

Please Martyup; in my format we're only at 19 pages. This (presumably healthy bowl scratch) has never happened before.  I think we may get to rendered glue stage before we completely wear out.

Really good comments on "both sides".  I don't think it is one or the other.  If he was really injured, he wouldn't be playing and would say so, watching in street clothes. (Can't hide actual injuries from the NFL.) If he's still sore/dinged/battered like many/most CFB players at the end of a season, he could certainly go and play well, but why not add a month to body recovery prior to really ramping it up for the combine? He'll prep better and run better if any nagging whatever is fully healed.  I think that is his honest position - I'm going to prep for the draft.  What is unsaid may be what Goose alludes to: "Yeah, I'm kind of done with you guys."  This is why we provide severance packages for people who quit at work (and don't have crazy important roles for crazy important projects - geeze not like that didn't happen twice this month), rather than letting them play out the string in front of everyone left behind to clean up the mess without that exciting alternate future.  CMAC didn't leave a mess by any means, but maybe he was just ready to move on and the Sun Bowl; rather than say a National Semi against Bama; isn't enough of an enticement to endure the dings that will slow down his prep. Or the chance of something worse of course.  But a football player can't tweet: "Skipping the Sun Bowl because I'm afraid I might get hurt."

Makes total sense.  I still hearken back to playground stuff where if you start something, you finish it. Multi millions weren't riding on it, but last year my son and his 1/C teammates at Navy all dealt with the issue of playing through injuries that might threaten their future commission just to get Army one last time.  My son played on a bum leg all season, which finally gave way about 20 seconds before halftime at West Point.  He did commission and recently received a perfect sore on his PRT despite single-digit temperatures.  Next decision: to snowboard or not while in California for a week.... A couple of his mates weren't as lucky.  One in particular required two shoulder surgeries.  It's not clear if he will be able to complete his qualification as a Navy SEAL.  He's in physical limbo indefinitely.  But he didn't give up the ship.

[jacketree]

Please Martyup; in my format we're only at 19 pages. This (presumably healthy bowl scratch) has never happened before.  I think we may get to rendered glue stage before we completely wear out.

Really good comments on "both sides".  I don't think it is one or the other.  If he was really injured, he wouldn't be playing and would say so, watching in street clothes. (Can't hide actual injuries from the NFL.) If he's still sore/dinged/battered like many/most CFB players at the end of a season, he could certainly go and play well, but why not add a month to body recovery prior to really ramping it up for the combine? He'll prep better and run better if any nagging whatever is fully healed.  I think that is his honest position - I'm going to prep for the draft.  What is unsaid may be what Goose alludes to: "Yeah, I'm kind of done with you guys."  This is why we provide severance packages for people who quit at work (and don't have crazy important roles for crazy important projects - geeze not like that didn't happen twice this month), rather than letting them play out the string in front of everyone left behind to clean up the mess without that exciting alternate future.  CMAC didn't leave a mess by any means, but maybe he was just ready to move on and the Sun Bowl; rather than say a National Semi against Bama; isn't enough of an enticement to endure the dings that will slow down his prep. Or the chance of something worse of course.  But a football player can't tweet: "Skipping the Sun Bowl because I'm afraid I might get hurt."

Makes total sense.  I still hearken back to playground stuff where if you start something, you finish it. Multi millions weren't riding on it, but last year my son and his 1/C teammates at Navy all dealt with the issue of playing through injuries that might threaten their future commission just to get Army one last time.  My son played on a bum leg all season, which finally gave way about 20 seconds before halftime at West Point.  He did commission and recently received a perfect sore on his PRT despite single-digit temperatures.  Next decision: to snowboard or not while in California for a week.... A couple of his mates weren't as lucky.  One in particular required two shoulder surgeries.  It's not clear if he will be able to complete his qualification as a Navy SEAL.  He's in physical limbo indefinitely.  But he didn't give up the ship.

[Mick]

To your points:

And I don't think that CMac is a quitter.

By definition, he is a quitter.  He quit on his team, which has another game to play.  Ergo, CMAC = quitter.

He has always been a Player. I do know that choosing to not come back and support the team that you have dedicated the almost three most important years of your young life towards has to be emotionally very, very difficult.

IYSS.  True, no one wants to be labeled a quitter. 

My personal gut tells me that CMac would follow his heart and play if his heart told him to do so.  I just think his heart is telling him that he has decided to go, so go now.

Fully agree on lack of heart.  Will be curious to see if NFL GMs and scouts feel the same.

It is not a matter of focus, it is a matter of commitment. He isn't any more, and he knows he isn't. He may have had some help in deciding this from a coaching staff that believes that "when you are gone, you are gone. Sometimes, if you are still eligible, you can come back. But you are in, or you are out. You can't be both. Next Man Up."

I wonder if it's the coaching staff or his family.  I would imagine the coaching staff would want him there, period, if for no other reason than team unity, presence, visual appeal, appeal to fans, appeal to recruits, etc.  Even if he just suited up and played 10 plays.

I think it's his parents, and a get-what-you-can-while-the-gettings-good attitude.

I just think that if Christian really felt he had it in him to play, he would have kept his mouth shut and played.

Unless he's injured, I disagree.  It's a bowl game against the #113 defense. 

I think if it were a pre-planned, calculated move entirely it would have happened at the same time he announced going pro, and it would certainly have had a better explanation than "prepare for the draft".

Totally agree.

I think that if Shaw had said "Christian, we really need you out there.", he would be playing.

I disagree with the premise.  I don't see Shaw saying "we really need you out there" to anyone.  That makes them bigger than the team.

The old statement "Lead, follow or get out if the way" is in action here. As a Freshman, he followed. As a Sophomore and Junior, he lead. Now, he has decided to get out of the way. Good for him.

Again, true by definition.  Keep in mind, that third part of the cliche is almost entirely derogatory.

[Mick]

To your points:

And I don't think that CMac is a quitter.

By definition, he is a quitter.  He quit on his team, which has another game to play.  Ergo, CMAC = quitter.

He has always been a Player. I do know that choosing to not come back and support the team that you have dedicated the almost three most important years of your young life towards has to be emotionally very, very difficult.

IYSS.  True, no one wants to be labeled a quitter. 

My personal gut tells me that CMac would follow his heart and play if his heart told him to do so.  I just think his heart is telling him that he has decided to go, so go now.

Fully agree on lack of heart.  Will be curious to see if NFL GMs and scouts feel the same.

It is not a matter of focus, it is a matter of commitment. He isn't any more, and he knows he isn't. He may have had some help in deciding this from a coaching staff that believes that "when you are gone, you are gone. Sometimes, if you are still eligible, you can come back. But you are in, or you are out. You can't be both. Next Man Up."

I wonder if it's the coaching staff or his family.  I would imagine the coaching staff would want him there, period, if for no other reason than team unity, presence, visual appeal, appeal to fans, appeal to recruits, etc.  Even if he just suited up and played 10 plays.

I think it's his parents, and a get-what-you-can-while-the-gettings-good attitude.

I just think that if Christian really felt he had it in him to play, he would have kept his mouth shut and played.

Unless he's injured, I disagree.  It's a bowl game against the #113 defense. 

I think if it were a pre-planned, calculated move entirely it would have happened at the same time he announced going pro, and it would certainly have had a better explanation than "prepare for the draft".

Totally agree.

I think that if Shaw had said "Christian, we really need you out there.", he would be playing.

I disagree with the premise.  I don't see Shaw saying "we really need you out there" to anyone.  That makes them bigger than the team.

The old statement "Lead, follow or get out if the way" is in action here. As a Freshman, he followed. As a Sophomore and Junior, he lead. Now, he has decided to get out of the way. Good for him.

Again, true by definition.  Keep in mind, that third part of the cliche is almost entirely derogatory.

[Mick]

To your points:

And I don't think that CMac is a quitter.

By definition, he is a quitter.  He quit on his team, which has another game to play.  Ergo, CMAC = quitter.

He has always been a Player. I do know that choosing to not come back and support the team that you have dedicated the almost three most important years of your young life towards has to be emotionally very, very difficult.

IYSS.  True, no one wants to be labeled a quitter. 

My personal gut tells me that CMac would follow his heart and play if his heart told him to do so.  I just think his heart is telling him that he has decided to go, so go now.

Fully agree on lack of heart.  Will be curious to see if NFL GMs and scouts feel the same.

It is not a matter of focus, it is a matter of commitment. He isn't any more, and he knows he isn't. He may have had some help in deciding this from a coaching staff that believes that "when you are gone, you are gone. Sometimes, if you are still eligible, you can come back. But you are in, or you are out. You can't be both. Next Man Up."

I wonder if it's the coaching staff or his family.  I would imagine the coaching staff would want him there, period, if for no other reason than team unity, presence, visual appeal, appeal to fans, appeal to recruits, etc.  Even if he just suited up and played 10 plays.

I think it's his parents, and a get-what-you-can-while-the-gettings-good attitude.

I just think that if Christian really felt he had it in him to play, he would have kept his mouth shut and played.

Unless he's injured, I disagree.  It's a bowl game against the #113 defense. 

I think if it were a pre-planned, calculated move entirely it would have happened at the same time he announced going pro, and it would certainly have had a better explanation than "prepare for the draft".

Totally agree.

I think that if Shaw had said "Christian, we really need you out there.", he would be playing.

I disagree with the premise.  I don't see Shaw saying "we really need you out there" to anyone.  That makes them bigger than the team.

The old statement "Lead, follow or get out if the way" is in action here. As a Freshman, he followed. As a Sophomore and Junior, he lead. Now, he has decided to get out of the way. Good for him.

Again, true by definition.  Keep in mind, that third part of the cliche is almost entirely derogatory.

[Mick]

To your points:

And I don't think that CMac is a quitter.

By definition, he is a quitter.  He quit on his team, which has another game to play.  Ergo, CMAC = quitter.

He has always been a Player. I do know that choosing to not come back and support the team that you have dedicated the almost three most important years of your young life towards has to be emotionally very, very difficult.

IYSS.  True, no one wants to be labeled a quitter. 

My personal gut tells me that CMac would follow his heart and play if his heart told him to do so.  I just think his heart is telling him that he has decided to go, so go now.

Fully agree on lack of heart.  Will be curious to see if NFL GMs and scouts feel the same.

It is not a matter of focus, it is a matter of commitment. He isn't any more, and he knows he isn't. He may have had some help in deciding this from a coaching staff that believes that "when you are gone, you are gone. Sometimes, if you are still eligible, you can come back. But you are in, or you are out. You can't be both. Next Man Up."

I wonder if it's the coaching staff or his family.  I would imagine the coaching staff would want him there, period, if for no other reason than team unity, presence, visual appeal, appeal to fans, appeal to recruits, etc.  Even if he just suited up and played 10 plays.

I think it's his parents, and a get-what-you-can-while-the-gettings-good attitude.

I just think that if Christian really felt he had it in him to play, he would have kept his mouth shut and played.

Unless he's injured, I disagree.  It's a bowl game against the #113 defense. 

I think if it were a pre-planned, calculated move entirely it would have happened at the same time he announced going pro, and it would certainly have had a better explanation than "prepare for the draft".

Totally agree.

I think that if Shaw had said "Christian, we really need you out there.", he would be playing.

I disagree with the premise.  I don't see Shaw saying "we really need you out there" to anyone.  That makes them bigger than the team.

The old statement "Lead, follow or get out if the way" is in action here. As a Freshman, he followed. As a Sophomore and Junior, he lead. Now, he has decided to get out of the way. Good for him.

Again, true by definition.  Keep in mind, that third part of the cliche is almost entirely derogatory.

[FarmBoy]

dedicated the almost three most important years of your young life

Was it even almost three years? Presuming he came to campus July of his Freshman year, he's only been formally in the program less than 2.5 years.

I think it's his parents

What makes this especially strange and I've seen few people discuss, is the fact that both his parents are Stanford alums and former athletes. If this is coming from them, I would find that especially strange that they don't have more of an emotional charge when it comes to Stanford sports.

[FarmBoy]

dedicated the almost three most important years of your young life

Was it even almost three years? Presuming he came to campus July of his Freshman year, he's only been formally in the program less than 2.5 years.

I think it's his parents

What makes this especially strange and I've seen few people discuss, is the fact that both his parents are Stanford alums and former athletes. If this is coming from them, I would find that especially strange that they don't have more of an emotional charge when it comes to Stanford sports.

[FarmBoy]

dedicated the almost three most important years of your young life

Was it even almost three years? Presuming he came to campus July of his Freshman year, he's only been formally in the program less than 2.5 years.

I think it's his parents

What makes this especially strange and I've seen few people discuss, is the fact that both his parents are Stanford alums and former athletes. If this is coming from them, I would find that especially strange that they don't have more of an emotional charge when it comes to Stanford sports.

[FarmBoy]

dedicated the almost three most important years of your young life

Was it even almost three years? Presuming he came to campus July of his Freshman year, he's only been formally in the program less than 2.5 years.

I think it's his parents

What makes this especially strange and I've seen few people discuss, is the fact that both his parents are Stanford alums and former athletes. If this is coming from them, I would find that especially strange that they don't have more of an emotional charge when it comes to Stanford sports.

[OutsiderFan]

I saw an interesting quote from Nick Saban who suggested that the decisions not to play in bowl games (Fournette, McCaffrey, and others) were directly related to the college football playoff.  I didn't get to watch the entire segment, but I could see the logic.  Players with an NFL future will obviously continue to play for their team in the playoffs, but for regular old bowl games the desire to play will be balanced against the risk of injury, etc.  The more the playoffs are emphasized, the more bowl games will be de-emphasized and the decision to play or not will be much like college all star games, balancing an opportunity to impress scouts against the risk of injury and a chance to devote full time to preparing for the draft.

Unexpected consequences.

BC

It's all the more reason to expand the playoffs and kill the bowl system.  If that means doing away with conference championship games, hallelujah!

I know I've been on record wanting no more than an 8-team playoff, but if Stanford eked in as a #16 seed this year, and say they played #1 Alabama, I highly doubt McCaffrey would be skipping that game.

Nick Saban is a wise man who's words should be heeded.

[OutsiderFan]

I saw an interesting quote from Nick Saban who suggested that the decisions not to play in bowl games (Fournette, McCaffrey, and others) were directly related to the college football playoff.  I didn't get to watch the entire segment, but I could see the logic.  Players with an NFL future will obviously continue to play for their team in the playoffs, but for regular old bowl games the desire to play will be balanced against the risk of injury, etc.  The more the playoffs are emphasized, the more bowl games will be de-emphasized and the decision to play or not will be much like college all star games, balancing an opportunity to impress scouts against the risk of injury and a chance to devote full time to preparing for the draft.

Unexpected consequences.

BC

It's all the more reason to expand the playoffs and kill the bowl system.  If that means doing away with conference championship games, hallelujah!

I know I've been on record wanting no more than an 8-team playoff, but if Stanford eked in as a #16 seed this year, and say they played #1 Alabama, I highly doubt McCaffrey would be skipping that game.

Nick Saban is a wise man who's words should be heeded.

[OutsiderFan]

I saw an interesting quote from Nick Saban who suggested that the decisions not to play in bowl games (Fournette, McCaffrey, and others) were directly related to the college football playoff.  I didn't get to watch the entire segment, but I could see the logic.  Players with an NFL future will obviously continue to play for their team in the playoffs, but for regular old bowl games the desire to play will be balanced against the risk of injury, etc.  The more the playoffs are emphasized, the more bowl games will be de-emphasized and the decision to play or not will be much like college all star games, balancing an opportunity to impress scouts against the risk of injury and a chance to devote full time to preparing for the draft.

Unexpected consequences.

BC

It's all the more reason to expand the playoffs and kill the bowl system.  If that means doing away with conference championship games, hallelujah!

I know I've been on record wanting no more than an 8-team playoff, but if Stanford eked in as a #16 seed this year, and say they played #1 Alabama, I highly doubt McCaffrey would be skipping that game.

Nick Saban is a wise man who's words should be heeded.

[OutsiderFan]

I saw an interesting quote from Nick Saban who suggested that the decisions not to play in bowl games (Fournette, McCaffrey, and others) were directly related to the college football playoff.  I didn't get to watch the entire segment, but I could see the logic.  Players with an NFL future will obviously continue to play for their team in the playoffs, but for regular old bowl games the desire to play will be balanced against the risk of injury, etc.  The more the playoffs are emphasized, the more bowl games will be de-emphasized and the decision to play or not will be much like college all star games, balancing an opportunity to impress scouts against the risk of injury and a chance to devote full time to preparing for the draft.

Unexpected consequences.

BC

It's all the more reason to expand the playoffs and kill the bowl system.  If that means doing away with conference championship games, hallelujah!

I know I've been on record wanting no more than an 8-team playoff, but if Stanford eked in as a #16 seed this year, and say they played #1 Alabama, I highly doubt McCaffrey would be skipping that game.

Nick Saban is a wise man who's words should be heeded.

[DC 86]

What makes this especially strange and I've seen few people discuss, is the fact that both his parents are Stanford alums and former athletes. If this is coming from them, I would find that especially strange that they don't have more of an emotional charge when it comes to Stanford sports.

It would be strange if their sports experience was limited to college, but in this case I believe Ed's 13 years in the NFL supersedes his Stanford period, and that is what informs his views. I don't doubt that Ed and Lisa get a charge out of Stanford sports, but as his son's father and advisor he is looking at this from the professional perspective (surely with direct advice from NFL general managers and personnel evaluators) and that is the foundation for the family's decision, overriding whatever emotions they have as alums.

[DC 86]

What makes this especially strange and I've seen few people discuss, is the fact that both his parents are Stanford alums and former athletes. If this is coming from them, I would find that especially strange that they don't have more of an emotional charge when it comes to Stanford sports.

It would be strange if their sports experience was limited to college, but in this case I believe Ed's 13 years in the NFL supersedes his Stanford period, and that is what informs his views. I don't doubt that Ed and Lisa get a charge out of Stanford sports, but as his son's father and advisor he is looking at this from the professional perspective (surely with direct advice from NFL general managers and personnel evaluators) and that is the foundation for the family's decision, overriding whatever emotions they have as alums.

[DC 86]

What makes this especially strange and I've seen few people discuss, is the fact that both his parents are Stanford alums and former athletes. If this is coming from them, I would find that especially strange that they don't have more of an emotional charge when it comes to Stanford sports.

It would be strange if their sports experience was limited to college, but in this case I believe Ed's 13 years in the NFL supersedes his Stanford period, and that is what informs his views. I don't doubt that Ed and Lisa get a charge out of Stanford sports, but as his son's father and advisor he is looking at this from the professional perspective (surely with direct advice from NFL general managers and personnel evaluators) and that is the foundation for the family's decision, overriding whatever emotions they have as alums.

[DC 86]

What makes this especially strange and I've seen few people discuss, is the fact that both his parents are Stanford alums and former athletes. If this is coming from them, I would find that especially strange that they don't have more of an emotional charge when it comes to Stanford sports.

It would be strange if their sports experience was limited to college, but in this case I believe Ed's 13 years in the NFL supersedes his Stanford period, and that is what informs his views. I don't doubt that Ed and Lisa get a charge out of Stanford sports, but as his son's father and advisor he is looking at this from the professional perspective (surely with direct advice from NFL general managers and personnel evaluators) and that is the foundation for the family's decision, overriding whatever emotions they have as alums.

[DC 86]

This will pose quite a dilemma for coaches.  They want and need the best players, but i'm certain that it drives them batsxxt crazy when they see CMAC or Fournette quit.

No doubt you are right that the trend of players quitting pre-bowl games drives coaches batsxxt crazy.

As I'm sure the players at Houston felt batsxxt crazy at Tom Herman having left for Austin while they played their bowl game, as I'm sure the players at Western Kentucky felt batsxxt crazy at Jeff Brohm being in West Lafayette while they played their bowl game, as I'm sure the players at South Florida were batsxxt crazy at Willie Taggart having departed for Eugene while they played their bowl game, etc etc.

So the chickens have come home to roost.

I don't like seeing Fournette, McCaffrey, Linwood bail on their teams pre-bowl, but it's the height of hypocrisy for Mark Richt and other coaches to decry that the practice has spread to players since it originated with coaches. It is inconsistent for there to be some degree of moral outrage at players quitting but shrugs at coaches quitting. Players have a lot to lose (ask Jaylon Smith and Willis McGahee), coaches staying on the job for a few more weeks is inconvenient but doesn't carry direct, immediate multi million dollar downside.

My feelings on McCaffrey's decision are somewhat ambivalent although generally I feel disappointed at his decision, but it does surprise me that the precedent set by coaches abandoning their teams pre-bowl games isn't viewed as likely having paved the way for this emerging practice.

[DC 86]

This will pose quite a dilemma for coaches.  They want and need the best players, but i'm certain that it drives them batsxxt crazy when they see CMAC or Fournette quit.

No doubt you are right that the trend of players quitting pre-bowl games drives coaches batsxxt crazy.

As I'm sure the players at Houston felt batsxxt crazy at Tom Herman having left for Austin while they played their bowl game, as I'm sure the players at Western Kentucky felt batsxxt crazy at Jeff Brohm being in West Lafayette while they played their bowl game, as I'm sure the players at South Florida were batsxxt crazy at Willie Taggart having departed for Eugene while they played their bowl game, etc etc.

So the chickens have come home to roost.

I don't like seeing Fournette, McCaffrey, Linwood bail on their teams pre-bowl, but it's the height of hypocrisy for Mark Richt and other coaches to decry that the practice has spread to players since it originated with coaches. It is inconsistent for there to be some degree of moral outrage at players quitting but shrugs at coaches quitting. Players have a lot to lose (ask Jaylon Smith and Willis McGahee), coaches staying on the job for a few more weeks is inconvenient but doesn't carry direct, immediate multi million dollar downside.

My feelings on McCaffrey's decision are somewhat ambivalent although generally I feel disappointed at his decision, but it does surprise me that the precedent set by coaches abandoning their teams pre-bowl games isn't viewed as likely having paved the way for this emerging practice.

[DC 86]

This will pose quite a dilemma for coaches.  They want and need the best players, but i'm certain that it drives them batsxxt crazy when they see CMAC or Fournette quit.

No doubt you are right that the trend of players quitting pre-bowl games drives coaches batsxxt crazy.

As I'm sure the players at Houston felt batsxxt crazy at Tom Herman having left for Austin while they played their bowl game, as I'm sure the players at Western Kentucky felt batsxxt crazy at Jeff Brohm being in West Lafayette while they played their bowl game, as I'm sure the players at South Florida were batsxxt crazy at Willie Taggart having departed for Eugene while they played their bowl game, etc etc.

So the chickens have come home to roost.

I don't like seeing Fournette, McCaffrey, Linwood bail on their teams pre-bowl, but it's the height of hypocrisy for Mark Richt and other coaches to decry that the practice has spread to players since it originated with coaches. It is inconsistent for there to be some degree of moral outrage at players quitting but shrugs at coaches quitting. Players have a lot to lose (ask Jaylon Smith and Willis McGahee), coaches staying on the job for a few more weeks is inconvenient but doesn't carry direct, immediate multi million dollar downside.

My feelings on McCaffrey's decision are somewhat ambivalent although generally I feel disappointed at his decision, but it does surprise me that the precedent set by coaches abandoning their teams pre-bowl games isn't viewed as likely having paved the way for this emerging practice.

[DC 86]

This will pose quite a dilemma for coaches.  They want and need the best players, but i'm certain that it drives them batsxxt crazy when they see CMAC or Fournette quit.

No doubt you are right that the trend of players quitting pre-bowl games drives coaches batsxxt crazy.

As I'm sure the players at Houston felt batsxxt crazy at Tom Herman having left for Austin while they played their bowl game, as I'm sure the players at Western Kentucky felt batsxxt crazy at Jeff Brohm being in West Lafayette while they played their bowl game, as I'm sure the players at South Florida were batsxxt crazy at Willie Taggart having departed for Eugene while they played their bowl game, etc etc.

So the chickens have come home to roost.

I don't like seeing Fournette, McCaffrey, Linwood bail on their teams pre-bowl, but it's the height of hypocrisy for Mark Richt and other coaches to decry that the practice has spread to players since it originated with coaches. It is inconsistent for there to be some degree of moral outrage at players quitting but shrugs at coaches quitting. Players have a lot to lose (ask Jaylon Smith and Willis McGahee), coaches staying on the job for a few more weeks is inconvenient but doesn't carry direct, immediate multi million dollar downside.

My feelings on McCaffrey's decision are somewhat ambivalent although generally I feel disappointed at his decision, but it does surprise me that the precedent set by coaches abandoning their teams pre-bowl games isn't viewed as likely having paved the way for this emerging practice.

[thunder_chik]

[quote author=FarmBoy link=topic=16303.msg183447#msg183447 date=1482441785]

What makes this especially strange and I've seen few people discuss, is the fact that both his parents are Stanford alums and former athletes. If this is coming from them, I would find that especially strange that they don't have more of an emotional charge when it comes to Stanford sports.

It would be strange if their sports experience was limited to college, but in this case I believe Ed's 13 years in the NFL supersedes his Stanford period, and that is what informs his views. I don't doubt that Ed and Lisa get a charge out of Stanford sports, but as his son's father and advisor he is looking at this from the professional perspective (surely with direct advice from NFL general managers and personnel evaluators) and that is the foundation for the family's decision, overriding whatever emotions they have as alums.
[/quote]
DC, I'm on the same page.  IIRC, his dad said a year or so ago that he totally supports players leaving early for the draft, so I wasn't surprised when #5 announced he wasn't coming back for his senior year.  I don't think Christian or any of his family members took this decision lightly (but I'm not sure they anticipated the extent of the discussion/backlash that would ensue).  Kirk Herbstreit weighed in on it this a.m.,  and I imagine it will still be under discussion up through our Sun Bowl game--especially if we play a lackluster game and, God forbid, lose.
Again, I understand the decision, but I'm also extremely disappointed that CMac won't be playing this final game. :'(

[thunder_chik]

[quote author=FarmBoy link=topic=16303.msg183447#msg183447 date=1482441785]

What makes this especially strange and I've seen few people discuss, is the fact that both his parents are Stanford alums and former athletes. If this is coming from them, I would find that especially strange that they don't have more of an emotional charge when it comes to Stanford sports.

It would be strange if their sports experience was limited to college, but in this case I believe Ed's 13 years in the NFL supersedes his Stanford period, and that is what informs his views. I don't doubt that Ed and Lisa get a charge out of Stanford sports, but as his son's father and advisor he is looking at this from the professional perspective (surely with direct advice from NFL general managers and personnel evaluators) and that is the foundation for the family's decision, overriding whatever emotions they have as alums.
[/quote]
DC, I'm on the same page.  IIRC, his dad said a year or so ago that he totally supports players leaving early for the draft, so I wasn't surprised when #5 announced he wasn't coming back for his senior year.  I don't think Christian or any of his family members took this decision lightly (but I'm not sure they anticipated the extent of the discussion/backlash that would ensue).  Kirk Herbstreit weighed in on it this a.m.,  and I imagine it will still be under discussion up through our Sun Bowl game--especially if we play a lackluster game and, God forbid, lose.
Again, I understand the decision, but I'm also extremely disappointed that CMac won't be playing this final game. :'(

[thunder_chik]

[quote author=FarmBoy link=topic=16303.msg183447#msg183447 date=1482441785]

What makes this especially strange and I've seen few people discuss, is the fact that both his parents are Stanford alums and former athletes. If this is coming from them, I would find that especially strange that they don't have more of an emotional charge when it comes to Stanford sports.

It would be strange if their sports experience was limited to college, but in this case I believe Ed's 13 years in the NFL supersedes his Stanford period, and that is what informs his views. I don't doubt that Ed and Lisa get a charge out of Stanford sports, but as his son's father and advisor he is looking at this from the professional perspective (surely with direct advice from NFL general managers and personnel evaluators) and that is the foundation for the family's decision, overriding whatever emotions they have as alums.
[/quote]
DC, I'm on the same page.  IIRC, his dad said a year or so ago that he totally supports players leaving early for the draft, so I wasn't surprised when #5 announced he wasn't coming back for his senior year.  I don't think Christian or any of his family members took this decision lightly (but I'm not sure they anticipated the extent of the discussion/backlash that would ensue).  Kirk Herbstreit weighed in on it this a.m.,  and I imagine it will still be under discussion up through our Sun Bowl game--especially if we play a lackluster game and, God forbid, lose.
Again, I understand the decision, but I'm also extremely disappointed that CMac won't be playing this final game. :'(

[thunder_chik]

[quote author=FarmBoy link=topic=16303.msg183447#msg183447 date=1482441785]

What makes this especially strange and I've seen few people discuss, is the fact that both his parents are Stanford alums and former athletes. If this is coming from them, I would find that especially strange that they don't have more of an emotional charge when it comes to Stanford sports.

It would be strange if their sports experience was limited to college, but in this case I believe Ed's 13 years in the NFL supersedes his Stanford period, and that is what informs his views. I don't doubt that Ed and Lisa get a charge out of Stanford sports, but as his son's father and advisor he is looking at this from the professional perspective (surely with direct advice from NFL general managers and personnel evaluators) and that is the foundation for the family's decision, overriding whatever emotions they have as alums.
[/quote]
DC, I'm on the same page.  IIRC, his dad said a year or so ago that he totally supports players leaving early for the draft, so I wasn't surprised when #5 announced he wasn't coming back for his senior year.  I don't think Christian or any of his family members took this decision lightly (but I'm not sure they anticipated the extent of the discussion/backlash that would ensue).  Kirk Herbstreit weighed in on it this a.m.,  and I imagine it will still be under discussion up through our Sun Bowl game--especially if we play a lackluster game and, God forbid, lose.
Again, I understand the decision, but I'm also extremely disappointed that CMac won't be playing this final game. :'(

[stupac2]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=16303.msg183437#msg183437 date=1482438845]
I saw an interesting quote from Nick Saban who suggested that the decisions not to play in bowl games (Fournette, McCaffrey, and others) were directly related to the college football playoff.  I didn't get to watch the entire segment, but I could see the logic.  Players with an NFL future will obviously continue to play for their team in the playoffs, but for regular old bowl games the desire to play will be balanced against the risk of injury, etc.  The more the playoffs are emphasized, the more bowl games will be de-emphasized and the decision to play or not will be much like college all star games, balancing an opportunity to impress scouts against the risk of injury and a chance to devote full time to preparing for the draft.

Unexpected consequences.

BC

It's all the more reason to expand the playoffs and kill the bowl system.  If that means doing away with conference championship games, hallelujah!

I know I've been on record wanting no more than an 8-team playoff, but if Stanford eked in as a #16 seed this year, and say they played #1 Alabama, I highly doubt McCaffrey would be skipping that game.

Nick Saban is a wise man who's words should be heeded.
[/quote]

Except it's probably not true. What's the difference between the BCS and the playoff in terms of the desire for a kid to play in the Sun Bowl? Or, for that matter, the pre-BCS system. It's not like 3-loss Stanford would ever have been in contention for a national title.

I think this is a case of post hoc ergo propter hoc thinking, and that if there is correlation, it's of the "drownings rise when ice cream sales go up" kind. No one drowns in ice cream, and these guys aren't starting to skip these games because of the playoff.

[stupac2]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=16303.msg183437#msg183437 date=1482438845]
I saw an interesting quote from Nick Saban who suggested that the decisions not to play in bowl games (Fournette, McCaffrey, and others) were directly related to the college football playoff.  I didn't get to watch the entire segment, but I could see the logic.  Players with an NFL future will obviously continue to play for their team in the playoffs, but for regular old bowl games the desire to play will be balanced against the risk of injury, etc.  The more the playoffs are emphasized, the more bowl games will be de-emphasized and the decision to play or not will be much like college all star games, balancing an opportunity to impress scouts against the risk of injury and a chance to devote full time to preparing for the draft.

Unexpected consequences.

BC

It's all the more reason to expand the playoffs and kill the bowl system.  If that means doing away with conference championship games, hallelujah!

I know I've been on record wanting no more than an 8-team playoff, but if Stanford eked in as a #16 seed this year, and say they played #1 Alabama, I highly doubt McCaffrey would be skipping that game.

Nick Saban is a wise man who's words should be heeded.
[/quote]

Except it's probably not true. What's the difference between the BCS and the playoff in terms of the desire for a kid to play in the Sun Bowl? Or, for that matter, the pre-BCS system. It's not like 3-loss Stanford would ever have been in contention for a national title.

I think this is a case of post hoc ergo propter hoc thinking, and that if there is correlation, it's of the "drownings rise when ice cream sales go up" kind. No one drowns in ice cream, and these guys aren't starting to skip these games because of the playoff.

[stupac2]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=16303.msg183437#msg183437 date=1482438845]
I saw an interesting quote from Nick Saban who suggested that the decisions not to play in bowl games (Fournette, McCaffrey, and others) were directly related to the college football playoff.  I didn't get to watch the entire segment, but I could see the logic.  Players with an NFL future will obviously continue to play for their team in the playoffs, but for regular old bowl games the desire to play will be balanced against the risk of injury, etc.  The more the playoffs are emphasized, the more bowl games will be de-emphasized and the decision to play or not will be much like college all star games, balancing an opportunity to impress scouts against the risk of injury and a chance to devote full time to preparing for the draft.

Unexpected consequences.

BC

It's all the more reason to expand the playoffs and kill the bowl system.  If that means doing away with conference championship games, hallelujah!

I know I've been on record wanting no more than an 8-team playoff, but if Stanford eked in as a #16 seed this year, and say they played #1 Alabama, I highly doubt McCaffrey would be skipping that game.

Nick Saban is a wise man who's words should be heeded.
[/quote]

Except it's probably not true. What's the difference between the BCS and the playoff in terms of the desire for a kid to play in the Sun Bowl? Or, for that matter, the pre-BCS system. It's not like 3-loss Stanford would ever have been in contention for a national title.

I think this is a case of post hoc ergo propter hoc thinking, and that if there is correlation, it's of the "drownings rise when ice cream sales go up" kind. No one drowns in ice cream, and these guys aren't starting to skip these games because of the playoff.

[stupac2]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=16303.msg183437#msg183437 date=1482438845]
I saw an interesting quote from Nick Saban who suggested that the decisions not to play in bowl games (Fournette, McCaffrey, and others) were directly related to the college football playoff.  I didn't get to watch the entire segment, but I could see the logic.  Players with an NFL future will obviously continue to play for their team in the playoffs, but for regular old bowl games the desire to play will be balanced against the risk of injury, etc.  The more the playoffs are emphasized, the more bowl games will be de-emphasized and the decision to play or not will be much like college all star games, balancing an opportunity to impress scouts against the risk of injury and a chance to devote full time to preparing for the draft.

Unexpected consequences.

BC

It's all the more reason to expand the playoffs and kill the bowl system.  If that means doing away with conference championship games, hallelujah!

I know I've been on record wanting no more than an 8-team playoff, but if Stanford eked in as a #16 seed this year, and say they played #1 Alabama, I highly doubt McCaffrey would be skipping that game.

Nick Saban is a wise man who's words should be heeded.
[/quote]

Except it's probably not true. What's the difference between the BCS and the playoff in terms of the desire for a kid to play in the Sun Bowl? Or, for that matter, the pre-BCS system. It's not like 3-loss Stanford would ever have been in contention for a national title.

I think this is a case of post hoc ergo propter hoc thinking, and that if there is correlation, it's of the "drownings rise when ice cream sales go up" kind. No one drowns in ice cream, and these guys aren't starting to skip these games because of the playoff.