Stanford's McCaffrey is Skipping the Sun Bowl

[CJsE]

I wonder if all these people would be as pissed if a kid on an academic scholarship skipped a class, exam or even a final to go on a book tour, attend a meeting with potential investors in his own company, demonstrate his invention on Shark Tank, give a presentation at a conference, etc.

I mean, they're both just students and the University maintains that the student-athlete designation is intended to protect the kids and prepare them for becoming a professional in their chosen field after graduation. Right?

 

[Swervin27]

paco, comparing a bowl game to a regular season game is beyond foolish. I may give you the argument that it is important as an OOC game, actually I wont. At least there is an argument though, a losing one but an argument nonetheless.. Are you serious when you compare a bowl game to a regular season Conference game? You seem like a pretty rationale poster, are you really trying to make that argument? Because stats are counted, that's your main argument?

 

[CrazyPaco]

paco, comparing a bowl game to a regular season game is beyond foolish. I may give you the argument that it is important as an OOC game, actually I wont. At least there is an argument though, a losing one but an argument nonetheless.. Are you serious when you compare a bowl game to a regular season Conference game? You seem like a pretty rationale poster, are you really trying to make that argument? Because stats are counted, that's your main argument?

I'm absolutely serious and I've given you multiple reasons multiple times. You have giving me nothing but your opinion backed up by nothing and have been disingenuous in your responses. If you have nothing else to give, this conversation is over.

 

[Swervin27]

I'm absolutely serious and I've given you multiple reasons multiple times. You have giving me nothing but your opinion back up by nothing and have been disingenuous in your responses.

is the evidence that players are skipping it to get ready for the nfl reason enough? I mean technically, if you are using the analytical approach then you have a point. I am using the real world perception. These games are silly, glorified exhbitions.. Now this playoff format is excluded of course, that's a true playoff, I am referring to the bowl games..

Mainly because there is no real repercussions to losing it.. Does anyone really look at bowl game results as a measuring stick to the season? Take how the coaches call these games.. they very often use younger players, more in a preparation for the upcoming season. If you lose a regular season, it effects things like rankings, standings, etc.. If you lose a bowl game, who cares, the players are on a plane home, getting ready for the next year or their life's work.

I guess we are arguing two different things. A win is a win is a win. A win against YSU in September counts equally as a win against Clemson in November or NW in January. For that, you have a point. My opinion is more realistically speaking, how the players, coaches and fans perceive this game vs. a regular season game..

 

[CorsosRevenge]

AngryPaco

 

[President Stache]

I wonder if all these people would be as pissed if a kid on an academic scholarship skipped a class, exam or even a final to go on a book tour, attend a meeting with potential investors in his own company, demonstrate his invention on Shark Tank, give a presentation at a conference, etc.

I mean, they're both just students and the University maintains that the student-athlete designation is intended to protect the kids and prepare them for becoming a professional in their chosen field after graduation. Right?

Well, students can miss class, and student-athletes can miss football games. I really dont think it is a regulatory type issue, it is more an ethical one. I think they shouldnt have any restrictions on when a kid goes pro, if a team wants to pay a 19 year old a million dollars to play football, he should be allowed to go, just as they are allowed in baseball or hockey or soccer, or sport.

Football isnt as brain dead as MMA, but it isnt brain surgery or aerospace engineering either.

And, yes, I think it is unethical for a coach to leave midseason too, just like it will be unethical if I quit my job in a middle of a project. Sometimes ethics are not the primary concern, and I mean that though. There are many reasons to break ethics, and we arent privy to many of them.

The Shark Tank example is a good one, that is a good point, and I always think the reason to go to college (outside of a philosophy degree or something) is to allow yourself better opportunities to earn more money in the future. So, you should take those chances. I think this case though would be more like a group of students work to get ONTO Shark Tank, then when they are accepted one bolts to take a job at a corporation.

 

[Swervin27]

I think if you ask a coach or a player or even a fan, which game they'd rather win, an ACC game or a bowl game, you'd get most replies saying the conference game. I think if you ask a coach or a player or a fan, if they'd rather beat NW in January or Ok State in September, you'd get the same reply..

But yeah, they keep stats for these games too.

 

[TempleBAPittMPA]

There was an Oklahoma player who did just that.

http://www.espn.com/college-footbal...ker-leaves-oklahoma-sooners-prepare-nfl-draft
http://es.pn/2geTLsL

I read the article,. The player in question has suffered two concussions. Perhaps he should have been shut down for the rest of the season period, regardless of whether he's an NFL prospect or a scrub,

 

[CrazyPaco]

is the evidence that players are skipping it to get ready for the nfl reason enough? I mean technically, if you are using the analytical approach then you have a point. I am using the real world perception. These games are silly, glorified exhbitions.. Now this playoff format is excluded of course, that's a true playoff, I am referring to the bowl games..

Mainly because there is no real repercussions to losing it.. Does anyone really look at bowl game results as a measuring stick to the season? Take how the coaches call these games.. they very often use younger players, more in a preparation for the upcoming season. If you lose a regular season, it effects things like rankings, standings, etc.. If you lose a bowl game, who cares, the players are on a plane home, getting ready for the next year or their life's work.

I guess we are arguing two different things. A win is a win is a win. A win against YSU in September counts equally as a win against Clemson in November or NW in January. For that, you have a point. My opinion is more realistically speaking, how the players, coaches and fans perceive this game vs. a regular season game..

Here's some more questions to address your point about perception:

What is more important for those not in the playoffs?: the final ranking of the complete end of the season or the one that comes out after the first week of December?

Likewise, which record is more important: the final record of a team or the record of a team after the first week of December?

Which ranking and record is looked and cited when someone looks up the history of that season?

Which teams are considered to have been more successful in a season: one's that won or lost their bowls?

If college football is still much about perception, is a program that wins its bowl more or less likely to be ranked or well regarded in the following year's preseason?

Would players rather have a ring for a bowl win or not?

Would you rather have a trophy for the case or not?

Do coaches have bonus clauses for bowl appearances and wins?

Do recruiters sell the experience of bowls to prep players? Or does "they stink and don't go to bowls" a figment?

Are you telling me that the performances in the 2003 Tire Bowl or the 2008 Sun Bowl didn't have an impact on how those season are perceived by Pitt fans to this day? How about the win in the '81 Sugar?

Of your points about games not being important apply to any final games of the season when a team is out of contention for a championship, unless they are playing for a bowl or bowl position, which you hear all the time, and therefore underscores their importance to those teams and programs.

When final rankings and national championships were awarded before bowls were played, and bowl statistics weren't part of the record books, I would agree with you, but it hasn't been that way in decades. Heck, we still refer to the 1963 team as a "no bowl team" because of the injustice of them not getting a "meaningless exhibition." Pitt turned down the Rose Bowl in 1937. That was a long time ago.

 

[Delpanther]

For Services rendered in the past?

I'd argue that he had a contract that in return for playing the "entire season" which included the bowl game, he was given free tuition and room/ board. He's breached the contract. I'd win that argument and he'd be repaying at least part of the consideration he received for upholding his end of the bargain.

 

[SteveAdams]

I'd argue that he had a contract that in return for playing the "entire season" which included the bowl game, he was given free tuition and room/ board. He's breached the contract. I'd win that argument and he'd be repaying at least part of the consideration he received for upholding his end of the bargain.

You would be wrong. Pro athletes are paid their salary for regular season. Post season is paid separately. Bowls are POST SEASON.. BLAME NUTTING

 

[paulbl99]

Of course it is a legitimate question.

But also from the perspective of the team and the program, what is the difference between regular season games and a bowl (once a team is eliminated from championship contention)?

Mostly games for teams not in championship contention are played either to achieve bowl eligibility or to position for a better bowl. You can't say that games played using the motivation of achieving a bowl are less important than the bowl itself. That is nonsense.

At least since the 1980s...
Bowls count the same as a regular season game to a team's overall record.
Bowl statistics count towards team and individual totals.
Bowl results influence rankings
Bowls afford extra weeks of practice
Bowls afford extra weeks of media coverage for the program
Bowls typically receive more media attention and are broadcast to wider audience than regular season games
Bowls come with perks for players.
Bowls are never declined or skipped unless as part of a punishment.
Bowls wins come with a trophy and often rings.

My question isn't whether or not a player has the right to skip them, but if they do, why is it any different than skipping the last few regular season games of a team not in contention? The class/graduation argument is a little disingenuous since many players, especially those that might be prone to do this anyway, are more likely to leave early or don't really attend college to earn a bachelors degree in the first place. It is a slippery slope.

Just an aside....
Bowl records crowned a new NCAA career rushing champ this past Saturday !
For a SDSU running back Who got credit for bowl games.

So yeah these games to your point ....
They count

 

[Swervin27]

Here's some more questions to address your point about perception:

What is more important for those not in the playoffs?: the final ranking of the complete end of the season or the one that comes out after the first week of December?

Likewise, which record is more important: the final record of a team or the record of a team after the first week of December?

Which ranking and record is looked and cited when someone looks up the history of that season?

Which teams are considered to have been more successful in a season: one's that won or lost their bowls?

If college football is still much about perception, is a program that wins its bowl more or less likely to be ranked or well regarded in the following year's preseason?

Would players rather have a ring for a bowl win or not?

Would you rather have a trophy for the case or not?

Do coaches have bonus clauses for bowl appearances and wins?

Do recruiters sell the experience of bowls to prep players? Or does "they stink and don't go to bowls" a figment?

Are you telling me that the performances in the 2003 Tire Bowl or the 2008 Sun Bowl didn't have an impact on how those season are perceived by Pitt fans to this day? How about the win in the '81 Sugar?

Of of your points about not being important apply to any final games of the season when a team is out of contention of a championship, unless they are playing for a bowl or bowl position, which you hear all the time, and therefore underscores their importance to those teams and programs.

When final rankings and national championships were awarded before bowls were played, and bowl statistics weren't part of the record books, I would agree with you, but it hasn't been that way in decades.

Jesus Paco, one or two questions at a time here.. I will answer your question below, I can tell you that our performance in a tire bowl had little if any impact on how the team was perceived.. The sugar bowl win was a very dramatic ending so that is fondly remembered moreso because of the drama than a win with a final ranking..

We can agree to disagree here, I mean it's ok for some of us to not lose too much sleep about a game 4 weeks separated from the regular season, in front of a neutral crowd. Personally, I'd rather see some of the younger guys get snaps but hey, to each his own.. a loss here won't dampen my opinion of this team nor will a win heighten it..

 

[NewEraPanthers]

Moving beyond the bowl games because to disappointed fans of course they're meaningless; this sets up a very slippery slope.

Couldn't the star players now argue that they won't play the OOC games because win or lose their team is still in it for a conference championship and a shot at the playoff? Once the team suffers their first conference loss couldn't they argue the season is now meaningless and refuse to play? That is why this crap is stupid.

Arguing that a scholarship isn't enough for the athletes is a complicated topic. But come on! The football players are not regular students. They're supplied with their own private tutors, special office hours, they get their own buildings to go study in and all sorts of resources that the average student can only dream of.

 

[CJsE]

I'd argue that he had a contract that in return for playing the "entire season" which included the bowl game, he was given free tuition and room/ board. He's breached the contract. I'd win that argument and he'd be repaying at least part of the consideration he received for upholding his end of the bargain.

And the school will never take an athlete to court to enforce that part of their "contract." The absolute last thing any University, or the NCAA, wants is more judicial scrutiny of the student-athlete definition. Especially in California.

 

[CorsosRevenge]

Bowl games serve no other purpose than for alumni to swing their dicks and conferences to beat their chests over a good record. Beyond that, if you're not in the final four you're irrelevant. No one remembers Pitt's collapse against Houston expect the fans of both teams. Quick- who won a the 2013 Alamo Bowl. No googling.

 

[CrazyPaco]

Jesus Paco, one or two questions at a time here.. I will answer your question below, I can tell you that our performance in a tire bowl had little if any impact on how the team was perceived.. The sugar bowl win was a very dramatic ending so that is fondly remembered moreso because of the drama than a win with a final ranking..

We can agree to disagree here, I mean it's ok for some of us to not lose too much sleep about a game 4 weeks separated from the regular season, in front of a neutral crowd. Personally, I'd rather see some of the younger guys get snaps but hey, to each his own.. a loss here won't dampen my opinion of this team nor will a win heighten it..

I complete disagree with you. Bowl performance impacts the perception of team's season. Some more than others, but almost always to some degree.

It also serves as a reward, particularly for seniors who deserve to play, not get benched, but that is my opinion.

I also shudder to think how this message board would look if we ended the season with a loss.

 

[Delpanther]

And the school will never take an athlete to court to enforce that part of their "contract." The absolute last thing any University, or the NCAA, wants is more judicial scrutiny of the student-athlete definition. Especially in California.

Understood... doesn't make it right... I think it's a terrible precedent.., either he's on the team or not.. If I were his HC I'd tell him to go screw himself and that goes double if I were a teammate.

 

[Jpripper88]

I'd argue that he had a contract that in return for playing the "entire season" which included the bowl game, he was given free tuition and room/ board. He's breached the contract. I'd win that argument and he'd be repaying at least part of the consideration he received for upholding his end of the bargain.

No, you actually wouldn't. The schools are welcome to implement pay for play contracts, though. I am sure the football players would love that.

 

[Pitt79]

Should a coach be expected to pay back wages earned if they don't coach a bowl game because they took a new job?

I think they should finish out the season before they are allowed to negotiate for new jobs to be honest.

 

[Pitt79]

I am reading a bunch of people who contribute nothing to the player's/team's success bitching as if the kid owes them something. The players don't owe you shit, they don't even owe their own team's fans anything.

They owe the school something, the school that gave them free tuition for 4 years specifically to play football.

Personally, if that doesn't make them obligated to play, then they should just end all athletic scholarships and just have the teams be selected from whatever regular students show up for a tryout in August, just like a high school.

 

[Swervin27]

They owe the school something, the school that gave them free tuition for 4 years specifically to play football.

Personally, if that doesn't make them obligated to play, then they should just end all athletic scholarships and just have the teams be selected from whatever regular students show up for a tryout in August, just like a high school.

this is funny.. the school got their share then some from these players.

 

[Pitt83Panther]

Look man.

These players are used by the school as pawns. Yes, they get free room and board. They also sacrifice their bodies (and if the research is to be believed, brains) so that the school can sell tickets, and gear and get tv revenue. The more good players, the better the team, the more money.

These kids were all recruited as business decisions by the school. None of these guys were recruited because they were good dudes. They were all recruited because Pitt Football Inc. thought they would add value to the organization.

Well, now these kids are making business decisions. College football is basically an unpaid internship. Spare me the "free school" argument. Isn't the same as a paycheck and you know it. A free education isn't paying off mom's mortgage, or putting some cash aside so dad can get tha back surgery he's been putting off.

If anything, both sides are now using each other.

Look....if you don't want the free education.......don't take it.
They know what the deal was when they signed on the bottom line!

 

[Pitt79]

I've always thought the answer was free lifetime tuition. Isn't that what schools are supposed to do??? Be in the business of educating? Preparing young people for life's challenges?

Great, I want free tuition for my daughter too then! If you're giving football players free tuition, and then you don't even care if they quit the team early, just give it to everyone.

 

[Pitt79]

this is funny.. the school got their share then some from these players.

No it didn't, not if there's a game left and they aren't injured and they quit! It amazes me that people think this is OK?

 

[Swervin27]

No it didn't, not if there's a game left and they aren't injured and they quit! It amazes me that people think this is OK?

it's annoying but what can you do about it? I"d be annoyed if one of our players did it, hell, Lucas Nix took off 1/2 a season. He at least had the dignity to lie about it and fake an injury though.

 

[CJsE]

Understood... doesn't make it right... I think it's a terrible precedent.., either he's on the team or not.. If I were his HC I'd tell him to go screw himself and that goes double if I were a teammate.

Doesn't make it right? This is college athletics, there is no such thing as the right thing. Just a few examples of the universities and NCAA doing the "right" thing.

This is a system whose architect went on record stating the system was invented to prevent athletes from gaining the legal protections given workers and likened the NCAA's treatment of student-athletes to neo-plantation workers.

An institution that had rules preventing multi-year scholarships until a few years ago. When the NCAA proposed changing the rules to allow, not require, multiyear scholarships in response to lawsuits and a congressional antitrust inquiry, it narrowly passed a challenge by university representatives that wanted to maintain the ability to refuse yearly renewal without cause.
*For reference 61.12% of NCAA schools voted to block the NCAA from allowing multiyear scholarships. 61.5% was needed to block the rule change. It wasn't just non-BCS teams voting to block the measure. Schools that voted for blocking include Clemson, FSU, Alabama, USC, VTech, WVU, Texas, Tennessee, Wisconsin, LSU, Cal, Lousiville, the Big 12 Conference, etc. Thankfully, Pitt voted to allow multiyear scholarships.

The contracts' transfer rules would be deemed illegal in half the states where they are implemented, if the athletes were categorized as employees.

Acting like the 18-22 year old athletes should have a higher responsibility for fairness than the institutions they represent is ridiculous. If McCaffrey sitting out a meaningless bowl game throws a grain of sand on that unbalanced scale, then I'm all for it.

 

[Pitt79]

Look....if you don't want the free education.......don't take it.
They know what the deal was when they signed on the bottom line!

No, you actually wouldn't. The schools are welcome to implement pay for play contracts, though. I am sure the football players would love that.

So a "football scholarship" isn't a contract that includes PLAYING FOOTBALL? That is too stupid to evn comment on. Other than to say, they agreed to accept a free education in EXCHANGE for playing football, that is PAY FOR PLAY. PAY FOR PLAY contracts have been in existence sine the 1st athletic scholarship was given.

 

[Pitt79]

it's annoying but what can you do about it? I"d be annoyed if one of our players did it, hell, Lucas Nix took off 1/2 a season. He at least had the dignity to lie about it and fake an injury though.

Like I said, write it into the contract that you pay back the tuition if you're healthy to play but sit out for personal reasons.

 

[Swervin27]

Like I said, write it into the contract that you pay back the tuition if you're healthy to play but sit out for personal reasons.

LOL, sure, why not. I can't see this causing any issues at all. Make em promise to play hard too, any loafing in practice or games and we make em pay for their books..

 

[jtownknowitall]

Are you telling me that the performances in the 2003 Tire Bowl or the 2008 Sun Bowl didn't have an impact on how those season are perceived by Pitt fans to this day? How about the win in the '81 Sugar?

The question is do the players have the same perception of these seasons as do the fans?

I agree that there is no real difference between the Syracuse game and the Pinstripe Bowl. Perhaps we will see a day where a player would have packed it in after the Clemson game or even after the VA Tech or Miami game. Maybe one will be so bold to say he is sitting out the Villanova and Marshall games but will play the ACC games.

What I do see as being different is those games are all played as part of a regular schedule while these bowl games are played weeks and even a month later.

 

[Pitt83Panther]

LOL, sure, why not. I can't see this causing any issues at all. Make em promise to play hard too, any loafing in practice or games and we make em pay for their books..

Yeah...like they need books

 

[CorsosRevenge]

Look....if you don't want the free education.......don't take it.
They know what the deal was when they signed on the bottom line!

You don't even know what "the deal" is. The "deal" is that these are not four year scholarships. They are rolling one year scholarships that can be pulled at any time: new coach comes in and doesn't like you? Too bad, see ya. Get injured? Too bad, see ya. And in the SEC schools have been over signing recruiting classes in order to shove kids off scholarships.

Lastly, it's college football, not the military. You're not invading Iraq, you're playing Rutgers. It's entertainment. Get over it.

 

[upj87]

LOL, sure, why not. I can't see this causing any issues at all. Make em promise to play hard too, any loafing in practice or games and we make em pay for their books..

No, not funny at all and makes perfect sense. However should they dog it they are being punks to their teammates..So be it but I'm guessing if these guys have to play, they will and they will with gusto. You will be at the bowl game and if you are medically cleared to play you will. Should you not choose to play you will pay for your final year of school as you are in breech of contract...for a done deal NFL prospect this repayment should not be an issue should he choose to go that route. .

Funny how easily I take this attitude as I am dolling out 32 grand a year for my kid at pitt...

 

[Pitt79]

LOL, sure, why not. I can't see this causing any issues at all. Make em promise to play hard too, any loafing in practice or games and we make em pay for their books..

Two different issues. This guy quit on his team before the season ended. I'd ****ing hate Connor for life if he did that. I'd rather win the bowl game than win a regular season game.

Not playing hard, loafing in practice, fine, that's not the same thing. JUST BE THERE as a member of the team, fulfill your OBLIGATION. Stanford didn't give this guy a scholarship so he could go pro. They gave him a scholarship to play football for Stanford.

 

[Pitt79]

No, not funny at all...However should they dog it they are being punks to their teammates..So be it but I'm guessing if these guys have to play, they will and they will with gusto. You will be at the bowl game and if you are medically cleared to play you will. Should you not choose to play you will pay for your final year of school as you are in breech of contract...for a done deal NFL prospect this repayment should not be an issue should he choose to go that route. .

Exactly, totally agree. Letting these a-holes get away with stuff like this is part of the whole "coddling" of athletes. Giving them free passes from their obligations they don't deserve.

 

[CorsosRevenge]

I'll start caring about players bailing on teams before bowl games when we start doing the same to coaches who bail before bowl games. Godd Graham bails and takes half the staff with him. Now you're playing SMU with half of a staff. Fat Boy kelly did the same at a Cincinnati. Rodriguez did the same to WVU.

Tell me again why these bowls are important when the f***ing coaches don't even care enough to stick around when they get hired somewhere else.

 

[Pitt79]

I'll start caring about players bailing on teams before bowl games when we start doing the same to coaches who bail before bowl games. Godd Graham bails and takes half the staff with him. Now you're playing SMU with half of a staff. Fat Boy kelly did the same at a Cincinnati. Rodriguez did the same to WVU.

Tell me again why these bowls are important when the f***ing coaches don't even care enough to stick around when they get hired somewhere else.

There should be rules about that too. The coaches also should not be allowed to leave early and other schools should be sanctioned for tampering if they start negotiation with coaches before their team's season is over.

 

[jtownknowitall]

You're stupid, what some of you are talking about makes no sense, the reason they got their tuition paid for the entire time they where there, was to play football, and you think it's ok for them to quit on that obligation early without penalty?

And you sound like a branch campus dummy

 

[burnie1105]

Like most universities, Pitt offers tuition remission to employees; if they were hiring an accountant or facilities manager or nurse for the student clinic, it wouldn't be acceptable for the university to say, 'Well, we won't be giving you a salary, but you get to take classes for free!'

Being a student-athlete entails a significant time commitment with great physical risks/costs; so long as they are not justly paid for their labor, I take no umbrage with athletes looking out for their best interests. Good for McCaffrey, and if JC followed in his footsteps, I would be the first to say it's the right decision.