[teejers1]

Oklahoma State's best receiver, Wallace, had a great first half in the Cheez-it bowl.  Then he decided, apparently,  that he had done enough to impress the pro scouts and decided not to play in the second half.  It was a close game in the end and Miami almost came back to win it.   

To me this is a new low in sportsmanship and team loyalty.  IMO, the coach should have sent him to the showers and given him a bus ticket home.

That really is low [if true]. It's one thing to let your team know you are sitting out a meaningless bowl game. It's another to have them include you in the game planning and prep, which means taking reps away from others, and then bail on them mid-game. Not sure it will matter to NFL teams though.

I agree it's a low move, especially if not pre-cleared with the coach.

Where I hesitate is in declaring it worse than not participating at all.  Yes, the reasons you cite are legit. But otoh, at least the player gave his teammates something in the post-season bowl game.  [I get why people here want to believe what the OSU receiver did was worse than bailing altogether . . . just not certain I'm "in" on that conclusion].  Both are bad in my book.  And both are understandable (though sitting out entirely is more understandable).

BTW, if the game was a blowout at halftime, would that change your analysis?

[teejers1]

Oklahoma State's best receiver, Wallace, had a great first half in the Cheez-it bowl.  Then he decided, apparently,  that he had done enough to impress the pro scouts and decided not to play in the second half.  It was a close game in the end and Miami almost came back to win it.   

To me this is a new low in sportsmanship and team loyalty.  IMO, the coach should have sent him to the showers and given him a bus ticket home.

That really is low [if true]. It's one thing to let your team know you are sitting out a meaningless bowl game. It's another to have them include you in the game planning and prep, which means taking reps away from others, and then bail on them mid-game. Not sure it will matter to NFL teams though.

I agree it's a low move, especially if not pre-cleared with the coach.

Where I hesitate is in declaring it worse than not participating at all.  Yes, the reasons you cite are legit. But otoh, at least the player gave his teammates something in the post-season bowl game.  [I get why people here want to believe what the OSU receiver did was worse than bailing altogether . . . just not certain I'm "in" on that conclusion].  Both are bad in my book.  And both are understandable (though sitting out entirely is more understandable).

BTW, if the game was a blowout at halftime, would that change your analysis?