|
|
Post by gnawitall on Dec 17, 2017 6:06:11 GMT -8
So... CM of Furd is a chump too? Uck or not... risk possible multi million dollar contract to play in a minor bowl. No coach or teammate begrudges him missing this game. it's the football version of one and done. |
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Dec 17, 2017 15:26:06 GMT -8
Conversely, the BSU receiver Wilson played, and played lights out, most likely improving his draft stock. I like that type of player.
|
|
|
|
Post by obf on Dec 17, 2017 17:57:40 GMT -8
If Nall comes back next year and we miraculously win 7 games and are in the Vegas bowl... Does that change our feeling on if he decides to sit out and prepare for the draft / combine?
I would be pretty bummed if Ryan decided not to play...
I assume if the bowl had been more meaningful (Rose Bowl or Playoff) that Freeman (and Nall in the Hypothetical above) would play for sure.
I very much dislike the idea of a player bailing on his team and fans, but the idea that coaches and admin are bailing on their teams at this time (including Taggart and our own Jonathan Smith, whose team is in a much better bowl than the Vegas bowl) for "business/Career reasons" is compelling... although mostly just compels me to dislike that coaches and admin can/do bail on their bowl games as well...
It's easy to say, "well it's just the meaningless postseason games", but the slippery slope is real. Just look at the tanking and resting in the regular season that is happening in the pros... Those are business decisions as well...
In a very real sense the Civil War was meaningless for the *ucks and for Freeman, only vanity was on the line for him... The truly correct business decision would have been to sit out the rest of the season once a bowl game was secured and it was obvious the ducks weren't making an "important" bowl game...
|
|
|
|
Post by korculabeav on Dec 17, 2017 21:15:13 GMT -8
If Nall comes back next year and we miraculously win 7 games and are in the Vegas bowl... Does that change our feeling on if he decides to sit out and prepare for the draft / combine? I would be pretty bummed if Ryan decided not to play... I assume if the bowl had been more meaningful (Rose Bowl or Playoff) that Freeman (and Nall in the Hypothetical above) would play for sure. I very much dislike the idea of a player bailing on his team and fans, but the idea that coaches and admin are bailing on their teams at this time (including Taggart and our own Jonathan Smith, whose team is in a much better bowl than the Vegas bowl) for "business/Career reasons" is compelling... although mostly just compels me to dislike that coaches and admin can/do bail on their bowl games as well... It's easy to say, "well it's just the meaningless postseason games", but the slippery slope is real. Just look at the tanking and resting in the regular season that is happening in the pros... Those are business decisions as well... In a very real sense the Civil War was meaningless for the *ucks and for Freeman, only vanity was on the line for him... The truly correct business decision would have been to sit out the rest of the season once a bowl game was secured and it was obvious the ducks weren't making an "important" bowl game... Unfortunately the same standard would apply to Nall in that hypothetical scenario. |
|
|
|
Post by korculabeav on Dec 17, 2017 21:17:23 GMT -8
Conversely, the BSU receiver Wilson played, and played lights out, most likely improving his draft stock. I like that type of player. Wilson >>>> Freeman. Much more character by deciding to play. Freeman has not margin for error. His 40 time is not great and several draft houses have him going 3rd to 5th round. Knowing what everyone knew before BSU blew out hole, on paper Freeman should have played to try and have big day on a nationally televised game against a ranked, solid opponent. |
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Dec 17, 2017 21:29:01 GMT -8
If Nall comes back next year and we miraculously win 7 games and are in the Vegas bowl... Does that change our feeling on if he decides to sit out and prepare for the draft / combine? I would be pretty bummed if Ryan decided not to play... I assume if the bowl had been more meaningful (Rose Bowl or Playoff) that Freeman (and Nall in the Hypothetical above) would play for sure. I very much dislike the idea of a player bailing on his team and fans, but the idea that coaches and admin are bailing on their teams at this time (including Taggart and our own Jonathan Smith, whose team is in a much better bowl than the Vegas bowl) for "business/Career reasons" is compelling... although mostly just compels me to dislike that coaches and admin can/do bail on their bowl games as well... It's easy to say, "well it's just the meaningless postseason games", but the slippery slope is real. Just look at the tanking and resting in the regular season that is happening in the pros... Those are business decisions as well... In a very real sense the Civil War was meaningless for the *ucks and for Freeman, only vanity was on the line for him... The truly correct business decision would have been to sit out the rest of the season once a bowl game was secured and it was obvious the ducks weren't making an "important" bowl game... Not for me. You either play or you’re not on the team anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Dec 17, 2017 22:09:44 GMT -8
If Nall comes back next year and we miraculously win 7 games and are in the Vegas bowl... Does that change our feeling on if he decides to sit out and prepare for the draft / combine? I would be pretty bummed if Ryan decided not to play... I assume if the bowl had been more meaningful (Rose Bowl or Playoff) that Freeman (and Nall in the Hypothetical above) would play for sure. I very much dislike the idea of a player bailing on his team and fans, but the idea that coaches and admin are bailing on their teams at this time (including Taggart and our own Jonathan Smith, whose team is in a much better bowl than the Vegas bowl) for "business/Career reasons" is compelling... although mostly just compels me to dislike that coaches and admin can/do bail on their bowl games as well... It's easy to say, "well it's just the meaningless postseason games", but the slippery slope is real. Just look at the tanking and resting in the regular season that is happening in the pros... Those are business decisions as well... In a very real sense the Civil War was meaningless for the *ucks and for Freeman, only vanity was on the line for him... The truly correct business decision would have been to sit out the rest of the season once a bowl game was secured and it was obvious the ducks weren't making an "important" bowl game... Not for me. You either play or you’re not on the team anymore. Obviously those in the profession think differently. You hear about it more now, but it has happened since at least 2003. There are plenty of "players" who never suit/have a chance to play and go to bowl games as part of the team. Draft stock playing well in a bowl game is baloney. Draft stock is measured over a season(s) and then measurable attributes, not some bowl game performance. Freeman's draft pros/cons would be the same whether he played or not. Didn't hurt SJ skipping the same bowl in '03, didn't hurt McCaffrey last year... |
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Dec 17, 2017 22:48:58 GMT -8
Freeman's draft pros/cons would be the same whether he played or not. Didn't hurt SJ skipping the same bowl in '03, didn't hurt McCaffrey last year... Ummm ... SJ was MVP of the 2003 Las Vegas Bowl. He played. Five TDs. Four rushing and one receiving. Thought I read on here he sat out?  ? My bad... should have checked myself. But, my point stands... Fournette was hurt by it... but guys like McGahee ('02) and Jaylen Smith had catastrophic injuries. The weird thing is a player sits out to protect his future while putting it all on the line physically for 3-4 years, but coaches can leave for a gig before a bowl game and it ok??? The players are putting their health on the line every day in practice and games, it should be their decision (and it is) to play is one more meaningless game. Question is, while a very high draft pick ever choose to sit out a NY's six bowl? A semi? Championship game? That might cause a real stir... but, of course didn't Bama lose key coaches now two years running??? |
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Dec 18, 2017 6:58:01 GMT -8
Not for me. You either play or you’re not on the team anymore. Obviously those in the profession think differently. You hear about it more now, but it has happened since at least 2003. There are plenty of "players" who never suit/have a chance to play and go to bowl games as part of the team. Draft stock playing well in a bowl game is baloney. Draft stock is measured over a season(s) and then measurable attributes, not some bowl game performance. Freeman's draft pros/cons would be the same whether he played or not. Didn't hurt SJ skipping the same bowl in '03, didn't hurt McCaffrey last year... Not for “ me”. Wrong on SJ, McCaffery was no longer part of the team at that point and didn’t practice or travel. |
|
|
|
Post by obf on Dec 18, 2017 9:34:53 GMT -8
So... CM of Furd is a chump too? Uck or not... risk possible multi million dollar contract to play in a minor bowl. No coach or teammate begrudges him missing this game. it's the football version of one and done. Except... One and dones dont skip march madness... Even if they are double digits seeds and expected to lose... |
|
