[OutsiderFan]

I too was at the Seattle Bowl.  In retrospect, the outcome should have been expected.  Stanford had one of its greatest seasons ever that year, having ascended to #8 in the BCS rankings at one point, but for several reasons, that season didn't translate into a major bowl game.  On top of that, Willingham was rumored to be leaving for ND.  And on top of that, it was a new bowl game in a baseball stadium.  On top of that, Georgia Tech wasn't as good as Stanford that season.  So it was uninspiring to Stanford players on at least three levels.  No wonder they got their asses kicked and played like doo doo.

To me, the takeaway is that whenever there is anything to make a game seem less meaningful, teams are at risk of not taking a game as seriously as a universally acknowledged to be important one against a good opponent.  It can be playing a team from a lower division or a team with a terrible record.  It can be a letdown after playing an emotional game or two in a row.  It can be playing in a lower tier bowl game.  It can be when a coach leaves his team.  Or it can be when a teammate decides a bowl game isn't worth him playing.

The fact CMac is sitting out the Sun Bowl sends an unmistakable and clear message to his teammates, the opponent, Stanford fans, UNC fans, Bowls executives, residents of El Paso, and the rest of the world who ares to listen, that their game isn't very meaningful.  How this message impacts the level at which Stanford plays remains to be seen, but there can be no doubting it has some impact.  At the very minimum, Stanford players are going to have to convince themselves the game matters, because they've had someone they respect tell them it doesn't. 

[OutsiderFan]

I too was at the Seattle Bowl.  In retrospect, the outcome should have been expected.  Stanford had one of its greatest seasons ever that year, having ascended to #8 in the BCS rankings at one point, but for several reasons, that season didn't translate into a major bowl game.  On top of that, Willingham was rumored to be leaving for ND.  And on top of that, it was a new bowl game in a baseball stadium.  On top of that, Georgia Tech wasn't as good as Stanford that season.  So it was uninspiring to Stanford players on at least three levels.  No wonder they got their asses kicked and played like doo doo.

To me, the takeaway is that whenever there is anything to make a game seem less meaningful, teams are at risk of not taking a game as seriously as a universally acknowledged to be important one against a good opponent.  It can be playing a team from a lower division or a team with a terrible record.  It can be a letdown after playing an emotional game or two in a row.  It can be playing in a lower tier bowl game.  It can be when a coach leaves his team.  Or it can be when a teammate decides a bowl game isn't worth him playing.

The fact CMac is sitting out the Sun Bowl sends an unmistakable and clear message to his teammates, the opponent, Stanford fans, UNC fans, Bowls executives, residents of El Paso, and the rest of the world who ares to listen, that their game isn't very meaningful.  How this message impacts the level at which Stanford plays remains to be seen, but there can be no doubting it has some impact.  At the very minimum, Stanford players are going to have to convince themselves the game matters, because they've had someone they respect tell them it doesn't. 

[OutsiderFan]

I too was at the Seattle Bowl.  In retrospect, the outcome should have been expected.  Stanford had one of its greatest seasons ever that year, having ascended to #8 in the BCS rankings at one point, but for several reasons, that season didn't translate into a major bowl game.  On top of that, Willingham was rumored to be leaving for ND.  And on top of that, it was a new bowl game in a baseball stadium.  On top of that, Georgia Tech wasn't as good as Stanford that season.  So it was uninspiring to Stanford players on at least three levels.  No wonder they got their asses kicked and played like doo doo.

To me, the takeaway is that whenever there is anything to make a game seem less meaningful, teams are at risk of not taking a game as seriously as a universally acknowledged to be important one against a good opponent.  It can be playing a team from a lower division or a team with a terrible record.  It can be a letdown after playing an emotional game or two in a row.  It can be playing in a lower tier bowl game.  It can be when a coach leaves his team.  Or it can be when a teammate decides a bowl game isn't worth him playing.

The fact CMac is sitting out the Sun Bowl sends an unmistakable and clear message to his teammates, the opponent, Stanford fans, UNC fans, Bowls executives, residents of El Paso, and the rest of the world who ares to listen, that their game isn't very meaningful.  How this message impacts the level at which Stanford plays remains to be seen, but there can be no doubting it has some impact.  At the very minimum, Stanford players are going to have to convince themselves the game matters, because they've had someone they respect tell them it doesn't. 

[OutsiderFan]

I too was at the Seattle Bowl.  In retrospect, the outcome should have been expected.  Stanford had one of its greatest seasons ever that year, having ascended to #8 in the BCS rankings at one point, but for several reasons, that season didn't translate into a major bowl game.  On top of that, Willingham was rumored to be leaving for ND.  And on top of that, it was a new bowl game in a baseball stadium.  On top of that, Georgia Tech wasn't as good as Stanford that season.  So it was uninspiring to Stanford players on at least three levels.  No wonder they got their asses kicked and played like doo doo.

To me, the takeaway is that whenever there is anything to make a game seem less meaningful, teams are at risk of not taking a game as seriously as a universally acknowledged to be important one against a good opponent.  It can be playing a team from a lower division or a team with a terrible record.  It can be a letdown after playing an emotional game or two in a row.  It can be playing in a lower tier bowl game.  It can be when a coach leaves his team.  Or it can be when a teammate decides a bowl game isn't worth him playing.

The fact CMac is sitting out the Sun Bowl sends an unmistakable and clear message to his teammates, the opponent, Stanford fans, UNC fans, Bowls executives, residents of El Paso, and the rest of the world who ares to listen, that their game isn't very meaningful.  How this message impacts the level at which Stanford plays remains to be seen, but there can be no doubting it has some impact.  At the very minimum, Stanford players are going to have to convince themselves the game matters, because they've had someone they respect tell them it doesn't. 

[JohnR34231]

I don't think it is a black or white thing. I don't think CMac is saying the game doesn't matter, he is just saying it doesn't matter sufficiently for him to risk forfeiting a childhood dream (not to mention millions of $) of playing in the NFL.

Whether that distinction affects how his former teammates approach the game is another question.

[JohnR34231]

I don't think it is a black or white thing. I don't think CMac is saying the game doesn't matter, he is just saying it doesn't matter sufficiently for him to risk forfeiting a childhood dream (not to mention millions of $) of playing in the NFL.

Whether that distinction affects how his former teammates approach the game is another question.

[JohnR34231]

I don't think it is a black or white thing. I don't think CMac is saying the game doesn't matter, he is just saying it doesn't matter sufficiently for him to risk forfeiting a childhood dream (not to mention millions of $) of playing in the NFL.

Whether that distinction affects how his former teammates approach the game is another question.

[JohnR34231]

I don't think it is a black or white thing. I don't think CMac is saying the game doesn't matter, he is just saying it doesn't matter sufficiently for him to risk forfeiting a childhood dream (not to mention millions of $) of playing in the NFL.

Whether that distinction affects how his former teammates approach the game is another question.

[FarmBoy]

he is just saying it doesn't matter sufficiently for him to risk forfeiting a childhood dream (not to mention millions of $) of playing in the NFL.

That's not actually what he said. It's what we're all inferring from what he said. All he has said that I can find (unless he's quoted elsewhere) is he would not play in the Sun Bowl so he "can begin [his] draft prep immediately." He doesn't say antything about reducing risk. We're all projecting a lot of things without corroboration from him. At best, we can infer that practicing for and playing in the Sun Bowl is NOT good preparation for the NFL draft, in his opinion. We can all draw all kinds of conclusions about other things underlying that very simple statement.

[FarmBoy]

he is just saying it doesn't matter sufficiently for him to risk forfeiting a childhood dream (not to mention millions of $) of playing in the NFL.

That's not actually what he said. It's what we're all inferring from what he said. All he has said that I can find (unless he's quoted elsewhere) is he would not play in the Sun Bowl so he "can begin [his] draft prep immediately." He doesn't say antything about reducing risk. We're all projecting a lot of things without corroboration from him. At best, we can infer that practicing for and playing in the Sun Bowl is NOT good preparation for the NFL draft, in his opinion. We can all draw all kinds of conclusions about other things underlying that very simple statement.

[FarmBoy]

he is just saying it doesn't matter sufficiently for him to risk forfeiting a childhood dream (not to mention millions of $) of playing in the NFL.

That's not actually what he said. It's what we're all inferring from what he said. All he has said that I can find (unless he's quoted elsewhere) is he would not play in the Sun Bowl so he "can begin [his] draft prep immediately." He doesn't say antything about reducing risk. We're all projecting a lot of things without corroboration from him. At best, we can infer that practicing for and playing in the Sun Bowl is NOT good preparation for the NFL draft, in his opinion. We can all draw all kinds of conclusions about other things underlying that very simple statement.

[FarmBoy]

he is just saying it doesn't matter sufficiently for him to risk forfeiting a childhood dream (not to mention millions of $) of playing in the NFL.

That's not actually what he said. It's what we're all inferring from what he said. All he has said that I can find (unless he's quoted elsewhere) is he would not play in the Sun Bowl so he "can begin [his] draft prep immediately." He doesn't say antything about reducing risk. We're all projecting a lot of things without corroboration from him. At best, we can infer that practicing for and playing in the Sun Bowl is NOT good preparation for the NFL draft, in his opinion. We can all draw all kinds of conclusions about other things underlying that very simple statement.

[OutsiderFan]

We can sit here and argue whether it impacts the team or how much, but it is on everyone's mind, at least a little, that the Sun Bowl, and frankly all the other non-playoff bowls matter less since Fournette, and especially CMac, are sitting them out on purpose.  The BCS diminished even the Rose Bowl a bit.  The playoff further diminished all the non-playoff bowls a bit more, and now these player abstentions are yet another blow to the perceived meaningfulness of non-playoff bowl games.

[OutsiderFan]

We can sit here and argue whether it impacts the team or how much, but it is on everyone's mind, at least a little, that the Sun Bowl, and frankly all the other non-playoff bowls matter less since Fournette, and especially CMac, are sitting them out on purpose.  The BCS diminished even the Rose Bowl a bit.  The playoff further diminished all the non-playoff bowls a bit more, and now these player abstentions are yet another blow to the perceived meaningfulness of non-playoff bowl games.

[OutsiderFan]

We can sit here and argue whether it impacts the team or how much, but it is on everyone's mind, at least a little, that the Sun Bowl, and frankly all the other non-playoff bowls matter less since Fournette, and especially CMac, are sitting them out on purpose.  The BCS diminished even the Rose Bowl a bit.  The playoff further diminished all the non-playoff bowls a bit more, and now these player abstentions are yet another blow to the perceived meaningfulness of non-playoff bowl games.

[OutsiderFan]

We can sit here and argue whether it impacts the team or how much, but it is on everyone's mind, at least a little, that the Sun Bowl, and frankly all the other non-playoff bowls matter less since Fournette, and especially CMac, are sitting them out on purpose.  The BCS diminished even the Rose Bowl a bit.  The playoff further diminished all the non-playoff bowls a bit more, and now these player abstentions are yet another blow to the perceived meaningfulness of non-playoff bowl games.

[Mick]

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.

You would think so.  I think he would be even less likely to play if Stanford was a #16 seed playing against Alabama's #1 ranked run defense.  Bama's run defense is monstrous and would do serious damage to McCaffrey's reputation.  They've given up an average of 63 yards per game and 2 yards per carry.  McCaffrey's poor games against Washington and Washington State have been forgotten in the glow of 200 yard efforts against some of the worst defenses in the NCAA.

if he runs against 'Bama, the illusion shatters.  It would materially affect where he's selected.

Assuming he's not injured, I think he's doing damage to his draft status by refusing to play against a very poor run defense.  After his near Hiesman run last year, he was projected to be a mid-to-late first round pick.  Other posters here tell me he's now projected to be a second round pick.  Well, okay.  On the surface, if he were to play in some mythical 'Bama v. Stanford game, he could vault himself back up in the draft with a great game.  Frankly, I think he could do the same were he to play in the Sun Bowl.

Of course, if he's injured but claiming he's "preparing for the draft," all he's doing is deceiving his future employers along with turning his back on Stanford's football team, coaches, fans and alumni.  And if I were a GM or scout, I'd be concerned.  But that's another story.

[Mick]

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.

You would think so.  I think he would be even less likely to play if Stanford was a #16 seed playing against Alabama's #1 ranked run defense.  Bama's run defense is monstrous and would do serious damage to McCaffrey's reputation.  They've given up an average of 63 yards per game and 2 yards per carry.  McCaffrey's poor games against Washington and Washington State have been forgotten in the glow of 200 yard efforts against some of the worst defenses in the NCAA.

if he runs against 'Bama, the illusion shatters.  It would materially affect where he's selected.

Assuming he's not injured, I think he's doing damage to his draft status by refusing to play against a very poor run defense.  After his near Hiesman run last year, he was projected to be a mid-to-late first round pick.  Other posters here tell me he's now projected to be a second round pick.  Well, okay.  On the surface, if he were to play in some mythical 'Bama v. Stanford game, he could vault himself back up in the draft with a great game.  Frankly, I think he could do the same were he to play in the Sun Bowl.

Of course, if he's injured but claiming he's "preparing for the draft," all he's doing is deceiving his future employers along with turning his back on Stanford's football team, coaches, fans and alumni.  And if I were a GM or scout, I'd be concerned.  But that's another story.

[Mick]

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.

You would think so.  I think he would be even less likely to play if Stanford was a #16 seed playing against Alabama's #1 ranked run defense.  Bama's run defense is monstrous and would do serious damage to McCaffrey's reputation.  They've given up an average of 63 yards per game and 2 yards per carry.  McCaffrey's poor games against Washington and Washington State have been forgotten in the glow of 200 yard efforts against some of the worst defenses in the NCAA.

if he runs against 'Bama, the illusion shatters.  It would materially affect where he's selected.

Assuming he's not injured, I think he's doing damage to his draft status by refusing to play against a very poor run defense.  After his near Hiesman run last year, he was projected to be a mid-to-late first round pick.  Other posters here tell me he's now projected to be a second round pick.  Well, okay.  On the surface, if he were to play in some mythical 'Bama v. Stanford game, he could vault himself back up in the draft with a great game.  Frankly, I think he could do the same were he to play in the Sun Bowl.

Of course, if he's injured but claiming he's "preparing for the draft," all he's doing is deceiving his future employers along with turning his back on Stanford's football team, coaches, fans and alumni.  And if I were a GM or scout, I'd be concerned.  But that's another story.

[Mick]

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.

You would think so.  I think he would be even less likely to play if Stanford was a #16 seed playing against Alabama's #1 ranked run defense.  Bama's run defense is monstrous and would do serious damage to McCaffrey's reputation.  They've given up an average of 63 yards per game and 2 yards per carry.  McCaffrey's poor games against Washington and Washington State have been forgotten in the glow of 200 yard efforts against some of the worst defenses in the NCAA.

if he runs against 'Bama, the illusion shatters.  It would materially affect where he's selected.

Assuming he's not injured, I think he's doing damage to his draft status by refusing to play against a very poor run defense.  After his near Hiesman run last year, he was projected to be a mid-to-late first round pick.  Other posters here tell me he's now projected to be a second round pick.  Well, okay.  On the surface, if he were to play in some mythical 'Bama v. Stanford game, he could vault himself back up in the draft with a great game.  Frankly, I think he could do the same were he to play in the Sun Bowl.

Of course, if he's injured but claiming he's "preparing for the draft," all he's doing is deceiving his future employers along with turning his back on Stanford's football team, coaches, fans and alumni.  And if I were a GM or scout, I'd be concerned.  But that's another story.

[JohnR34231]

he is just saying it doesn't matter sufficiently for him to risk forfeiting a childhood dream (not to mention millions of $) of playing in the NFL.

That's not actually what he said. It's what we're all inferring from what he said. All he has said that I can find (unless he's quoted elsewhere) is he would not play in the Sun Bowl so he "can begin [his] draft prep immediately." He doesn't say antything about reducing risk. We're all projecting a lot of things without corroboration from him. At best, we can infer that practicing for and playing in the Sun Bowl is NOT good preparation for the NFL draft, in his opinion. We can all draw all kinds of conclusions about other things underlying that very simple statement.

Well, given what CMac said, it is pretty hard to comment on it without making some inferences. Are you suggesting we shouldn't be making them? Seems to me to be pretty harmless speculation of the type that gets done all the time on this and other sports message boards.

I mean if you want to get picky, I'm not sure you can even infer that CMac feels that preparing for and playing in the Sun Bowl is not good preparation for the draft. Rather he just feels what he is planning on doing instead will be better.

[JohnR34231]

he is just saying it doesn't matter sufficiently for him to risk forfeiting a childhood dream (not to mention millions of $) of playing in the NFL.

That's not actually what he said. It's what we're all inferring from what he said. All he has said that I can find (unless he's quoted elsewhere) is he would not play in the Sun Bowl so he "can begin [his] draft prep immediately." He doesn't say antything about reducing risk. We're all projecting a lot of things without corroboration from him. At best, we can infer that practicing for and playing in the Sun Bowl is NOT good preparation for the NFL draft, in his opinion. We can all draw all kinds of conclusions about other things underlying that very simple statement.

Well, given what CMac said, it is pretty hard to comment on it without making some inferences. Are you suggesting we shouldn't be making them? Seems to me to be pretty harmless speculation of the type that gets done all the time on this and other sports message boards.

I mean if you want to get picky, I'm not sure you can even infer that CMac feels that preparing for and playing in the Sun Bowl is not good preparation for the draft. Rather he just feels what he is planning on doing instead will be better.

[JohnR34231]

he is just saying it doesn't matter sufficiently for him to risk forfeiting a childhood dream (not to mention millions of $) of playing in the NFL.

That's not actually what he said. It's what we're all inferring from what he said. All he has said that I can find (unless he's quoted elsewhere) is he would not play in the Sun Bowl so he "can begin [his] draft prep immediately." He doesn't say antything about reducing risk. We're all projecting a lot of things without corroboration from him. At best, we can infer that practicing for and playing in the Sun Bowl is NOT good preparation for the NFL draft, in his opinion. We can all draw all kinds of conclusions about other things underlying that very simple statement.

Well, given what CMac said, it is pretty hard to comment on it without making some inferences. Are you suggesting we shouldn't be making them? Seems to me to be pretty harmless speculation of the type that gets done all the time on this and other sports message boards.

I mean if you want to get picky, I'm not sure you can even infer that CMac feels that preparing for and playing in the Sun Bowl is not good preparation for the draft. Rather he just feels what he is planning on doing instead will be better.

[JohnR34231]

he is just saying it doesn't matter sufficiently for him to risk forfeiting a childhood dream (not to mention millions of $) of playing in the NFL.

That's not actually what he said. It's what we're all inferring from what he said. All he has said that I can find (unless he's quoted elsewhere) is he would not play in the Sun Bowl so he "can begin [his] draft prep immediately." He doesn't say antything about reducing risk. We're all projecting a lot of things without corroboration from him. At best, we can infer that practicing for and playing in the Sun Bowl is NOT good preparation for the NFL draft, in his opinion. We can all draw all kinds of conclusions about other things underlying that very simple statement.

Well, given what CMac said, it is pretty hard to comment on it without making some inferences. Are you suggesting we shouldn't be making them? Seems to me to be pretty harmless speculation of the type that gets done all the time on this and other sports message boards.

I mean if you want to get picky, I'm not sure you can even infer that CMac feels that preparing for and playing in the Sun Bowl is not good preparation for the draft. Rather he just feels what he is planning on doing instead will be better.

[CTcard]

... McCaffrey's poor games against Washington and Washington State have been forgotten in the glow of 200 yard efforts against some of the worst defenses in the NCAA.

I wouldn't read too much into those two games.

They were McCaffrey's worst two games. To some extent this was because of the number of times he touched the ball, which in turn was at least partly because we fell so far behind so quickly we went into pass all the time mode. In both games he averaged over 4 yds/carry (4.08 vs UW, 4.38 vs WSU), which isn't great but not terrible for your worst games of the year. In 2015, for example, he averaged 2.90 yds/carry vs UCF, 3.48 vs und, and only 4.42 vs U$C game #1 - a game he was generally viewed as having played well. Fournette had worse down games than that, so did Dalvin Cook.

On the other hand, the other issue in those two games, both in how he performed and the number of times he touched the ball, was that he was not fully healthy - and he missed the next game vs und. One of the reasons McCaffrey is viewed as "only" the third RB for the NFL draft is because he is somewhat smaller than a lot of guys, most particularly Fournette (235 pounds) and even Dalvin Cook (who's a little shorter and about 10-15 pounds heavier). That size issue translates into worries about how he'll hold up - and having a track record of injury doesn't help on that score.

Assuming he's not injured, I think he's doing damage to his draft status by refusing to play against a very poor run defense.  After his near Hiesman run last year, he was projected to be a mid-to-late first round pick.  Other posters here tell me he's now projected to be a second round pick. 

One thing for sure, McCaffrey has as good a set of advisors as anyone to know (and the ability to ask relevant people in the league) whether this move will hurt his draft stock or not. Of course draft position is determined by decisions of individual people with all their own beliefs and biases, so one can never really determine such a thing. But, I see no reason to doubt that McCaffrey and his folks cannot best evaluate the risk/reward of this decision for his draft position. The issues surrounding whether this was a "proper" move don't really rest on that.

[As an added note, the fact that McCaffrey's projected draft status hasn't really changed from the end of last season until now probably means it's pretty set, though that statement comes with the rather large caveat that the people making these projections don't know anything and the people who know something either don't talk or lie.]

[CTcard]

... McCaffrey's poor games against Washington and Washington State have been forgotten in the glow of 200 yard efforts against some of the worst defenses in the NCAA.

I wouldn't read too much into those two games.

They were McCaffrey's worst two games. To some extent this was because of the number of times he touched the ball, which in turn was at least partly because we fell so far behind so quickly we went into pass all the time mode. In both games he averaged over 4 yds/carry (4.08 vs UW, 4.38 vs WSU), which isn't great but not terrible for your worst games of the year. In 2015, for example, he averaged 2.90 yds/carry vs UCF, 3.48 vs und, and only 4.42 vs U$C game #1 - a game he was generally viewed as having played well. Fournette had worse down games than that, so did Dalvin Cook.

On the other hand, the other issue in those two games, both in how he performed and the number of times he touched the ball, was that he was not fully healthy - and he missed the next game vs und. One of the reasons McCaffrey is viewed as "only" the third RB for the NFL draft is because he is somewhat smaller than a lot of guys, most particularly Fournette (235 pounds) and even Dalvin Cook (who's a little shorter and about 10-15 pounds heavier). That size issue translates into worries about how he'll hold up - and having a track record of injury doesn't help on that score.

Assuming he's not injured, I think he's doing damage to his draft status by refusing to play against a very poor run defense.  After his near Hiesman run last year, he was projected to be a mid-to-late first round pick.  Other posters here tell me he's now projected to be a second round pick. 

One thing for sure, McCaffrey has as good a set of advisors as anyone to know (and the ability to ask relevant people in the league) whether this move will hurt his draft stock or not. Of course draft position is determined by decisions of individual people with all their own beliefs and biases, so one can never really determine such a thing. But, I see no reason to doubt that McCaffrey and his folks cannot best evaluate the risk/reward of this decision for his draft position. The issues surrounding whether this was a "proper" move don't really rest on that.

[As an added note, the fact that McCaffrey's projected draft status hasn't really changed from the end of last season until now probably means it's pretty set, though that statement comes with the rather large caveat that the people making these projections don't know anything and the people who know something either don't talk or lie.]

[CTcard]

... McCaffrey's poor games against Washington and Washington State have been forgotten in the glow of 200 yard efforts against some of the worst defenses in the NCAA.

I wouldn't read too much into those two games.

They were McCaffrey's worst two games. To some extent this was because of the number of times he touched the ball, which in turn was at least partly because we fell so far behind so quickly we went into pass all the time mode. In both games he averaged over 4 yds/carry (4.08 vs UW, 4.38 vs WSU), which isn't great but not terrible for your worst games of the year. In 2015, for example, he averaged 2.90 yds/carry vs UCF, 3.48 vs und, and only 4.42 vs U$C game #1 - a game he was generally viewed as having played well. Fournette had worse down games than that, so did Dalvin Cook.

On the other hand, the other issue in those two games, both in how he performed and the number of times he touched the ball, was that he was not fully healthy - and he missed the next game vs und. One of the reasons McCaffrey is viewed as "only" the third RB for the NFL draft is because he is somewhat smaller than a lot of guys, most particularly Fournette (235 pounds) and even Dalvin Cook (who's a little shorter and about 10-15 pounds heavier). That size issue translates into worries about how he'll hold up - and having a track record of injury doesn't help on that score.

Assuming he's not injured, I think he's doing damage to his draft status by refusing to play against a very poor run defense.  After his near Hiesman run last year, he was projected to be a mid-to-late first round pick.  Other posters here tell me he's now projected to be a second round pick. 

One thing for sure, McCaffrey has as good a set of advisors as anyone to know (and the ability to ask relevant people in the league) whether this move will hurt his draft stock or not. Of course draft position is determined by decisions of individual people with all their own beliefs and biases, so one can never really determine such a thing. But, I see no reason to doubt that McCaffrey and his folks cannot best evaluate the risk/reward of this decision for his draft position. The issues surrounding whether this was a "proper" move don't really rest on that.

[As an added note, the fact that McCaffrey's projected draft status hasn't really changed from the end of last season until now probably means it's pretty set, though that statement comes with the rather large caveat that the people making these projections don't know anything and the people who know something either don't talk or lie.]

[CTcard]

... McCaffrey's poor games against Washington and Washington State have been forgotten in the glow of 200 yard efforts against some of the worst defenses in the NCAA.

I wouldn't read too much into those two games.

They were McCaffrey's worst two games. To some extent this was because of the number of times he touched the ball, which in turn was at least partly because we fell so far behind so quickly we went into pass all the time mode. In both games he averaged over 4 yds/carry (4.08 vs UW, 4.38 vs WSU), which isn't great but not terrible for your worst games of the year. In 2015, for example, he averaged 2.90 yds/carry vs UCF, 3.48 vs und, and only 4.42 vs U$C game #1 - a game he was generally viewed as having played well. Fournette had worse down games than that, so did Dalvin Cook.

On the other hand, the other issue in those two games, both in how he performed and the number of times he touched the ball, was that he was not fully healthy - and he missed the next game vs und. One of the reasons McCaffrey is viewed as "only" the third RB for the NFL draft is because he is somewhat smaller than a lot of guys, most particularly Fournette (235 pounds) and even Dalvin Cook (who's a little shorter and about 10-15 pounds heavier). That size issue translates into worries about how he'll hold up - and having a track record of injury doesn't help on that score.

Assuming he's not injured, I think he's doing damage to his draft status by refusing to play against a very poor run defense.  After his near Hiesman run last year, he was projected to be a mid-to-late first round pick.  Other posters here tell me he's now projected to be a second round pick. 

One thing for sure, McCaffrey has as good a set of advisors as anyone to know (and the ability to ask relevant people in the league) whether this move will hurt his draft stock or not. Of course draft position is determined by decisions of individual people with all their own beliefs and biases, so one can never really determine such a thing. But, I see no reason to doubt that McCaffrey and his folks cannot best evaluate the risk/reward of this decision for his draft position. The issues surrounding whether this was a "proper" move don't really rest on that.

[As an added note, the fact that McCaffrey's projected draft status hasn't really changed from the end of last season until now probably means it's pretty set, though that statement comes with the rather large caveat that the people making these projections don't know anything and the people who know something either don't talk or lie.]

[FarmBoy]

Speculate away. I know I have. I just wanted to recalibrate on what we actually know of his decision. He doesn't say anything about getting healthy or avoiding injury. Just a desire to get whatever marginal improvement in his draft by preparing outside of the team environment. We have 20 pages of speculation that build on very little actual info.

[FarmBoy]

Speculate away. I know I have. I just wanted to recalibrate on what we actually know of his decision. He doesn't say anything about getting healthy or avoiding injury. Just a desire to get whatever marginal improvement in his draft by preparing outside of the team environment. We have 20 pages of speculation that build on very little actual info.

[FarmBoy]

Speculate away. I know I have. I just wanted to recalibrate on what we actually know of his decision. He doesn't say anything about getting healthy or avoiding injury. Just a desire to get whatever marginal improvement in his draft by preparing outside of the team environment. We have 20 pages of speculation that build on very little actual info.

[FarmBoy]

Speculate away. I know I have. I just wanted to recalibrate on what we actually know of his decision. He doesn't say anything about getting healthy or avoiding injury. Just a desire to get whatever marginal improvement in his draft by preparing outside of the team environment. We have 20 pages of speculation that build on very little actual info.

[JohnR34231]

Speculate away. I know I have. I just wanted to recalibrate on what we actually know of his decision. He doesn't say anything about getting healthy or avoiding injury. Just a desire to get whatever marginal improvement in his draft by preparing outside of the team environment. We have 20 pages of speculation that build on very little actual info.

Hey, that's fine. I would have assumed we all realized that, but perhaps some of us didn't and needed a reminder.

[JohnR34231]

Speculate away. I know I have. I just wanted to recalibrate on what we actually know of his decision. He doesn't say anything about getting healthy or avoiding injury. Just a desire to get whatever marginal improvement in his draft by preparing outside of the team environment. We have 20 pages of speculation that build on very little actual info.

Hey, that's fine. I would have assumed we all realized that, but perhaps some of us didn't and needed a reminder.

[JohnR34231]

Speculate away. I know I have. I just wanted to recalibrate on what we actually know of his decision. He doesn't say anything about getting healthy or avoiding injury. Just a desire to get whatever marginal improvement in his draft by preparing outside of the team environment. We have 20 pages of speculation that build on very little actual info.

Hey, that's fine. I would have assumed we all realized that, but perhaps some of us didn't and needed a reminder.

[JohnR34231]

Speculate away. I know I have. I just wanted to recalibrate on what we actually know of his decision. He doesn't say anything about getting healthy or avoiding injury. Just a desire to get whatever marginal improvement in his draft by preparing outside of the team environment. We have 20 pages of speculation that build on very little actual info.

Hey, that's fine. I would have assumed we all realized that, but perhaps some of us didn't and needed a reminder.

[TreesAndBirds]

Nothing very surprising, but a good summary of how the NFL likely views players skipping bowl games.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/this-is-how...37558.html

[TreesAndBirds]

Nothing very surprising, but a good summary of how the NFL likely views players skipping bowl games.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/this-is-how...37558.html

[TreesAndBirds]

Nothing very surprising, but a good summary of how the NFL likely views players skipping bowl games.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/this-is-how...37558.html

[TreesAndBirds]

Nothing very surprising, but a good summary of how the NFL likely views players skipping bowl games.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/this-is-how...37558.html