JRsec
Super Moderator
Posts: 37,891
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
|
RE: P5 vs. P5 bowl matchups
(12-29-2017 04:19 PM)ken d Wrote: (12-29-2017 02:02 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: (12-29-2017 12:44 PM)Wedge Wrote: If the question is, "Having entertained the fans by playing 40-50 college football games for free, are the fans entitled to be upset if a player declines to play one more game for free?" -- the answer is obviously no.
We're talking about postseason games that are just exhibitions. Each player has the right to choose to play in the Whatever Bowl, or the NIT, or not. Another way to think of it is, from the perspective of a future NFL or NBA player, "What am I getting out of this, playing these games for nothing?" Their answer might be, probably should be, "It's an audition for professional jobs." If a player has played 40-50 college football games, or 30-plus college basketball games, he might decide that he's already done well in his auditions, and doesn't need one more. Or he might decide that he loves playing so much that he'll play any game he can get into, whether it's the Whatever Bowl or something equally meaningful, like a pickup basketball game at the park. Either way, I'm fine with it.
Players skipping games that are exhibitions actually doesn't bother me. I don't blame the kids for looking out for their future in those circumstances. And as someone pointed out the other day, coaches do the same thing every time they switch jobs. I realize there is a business side to the game and I'm fine with that. People have to make a living...it's what makes the world go 'round
However, I do miss the days when players wouldn't consider skipping the bowl games because they actually meant something more than just production for a TV network.
With that said, my only contention with your premise is that college players are entertaining their fans for free. Nobody works for free. Players sign up for college athletics voluntarily and always have. If they think they're getting screwed then they are free to walk away at any time. The reason they fall all over themselves to sign the contract is because it's actually a pretty good deal for them. It probably should be a slightly better deal in some respects and I'm all for anything that helps the players short of upending the system and paying them as professionals, but it's still a pretty good deal nonetheless.
That and on some level, fans are entitled to be upset as long they're the ones footing the bill. Fans buy the tickets, watch the games, buy the merchandise, and make the donations.
The problem isn't the fans being upset or the players skipping the games for that matter. The problem is that there are people outside the game(TV networks mostly) who are more interested in making money than they are in what's best for the game.
When did bowls ever mean something in a way that players wouldn't consider skipping them? The change isn't with the bowls or the bowl system. The change is with how much money is potentially available to the players after they turn pro. Years ago, the financial stakes were much lower for players.
Years ago Ken D the players used the bowls (which were much fewer in number) as national exposure to enhance their draft status. The kids whose schools didn't make the bowls hoped for an invitation to the Senior Bowl, the East West Shrine Game, or the Blue Gray Classic where they could pick up their first checks for playing and still showcase their talents. I remember freezing by butt off in December at Crampton Bowl watching the Blue Gray Classic and counting the number of pro scouts that were there for all of the events.
Now the pro scouts do their evaluation at the combines. Things have radically changed. All Star games are now passe and a risk of injury and so all bowls but the CFP are as well. Auburn's All American Corner Back skipped the bowl game yesterday and a healed Cam Pettway skipped it altogether and will likely declare for the draft.
Now if we move to a pay model for the upper tier and sign contracts instead of grants in aid then all of this will go away. Players will contractually be bound to the schools for the entire season and post season. Otherwise, we need to play the CFP games during the holidays and move all bowls to pre season kickoff classics.
|
|
01-02-2018 05:27 PM |
|
Wedge
Moderator
Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
|
RE: P5 vs. P5 bowl matchups
(01-02-2018 05:27 PM)JRsec Wrote: (12-29-2017 04:19 PM)ken d Wrote: (12-29-2017 02:02 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: (12-29-2017 12:44 PM)Wedge Wrote: If the question is, "Having entertained the fans by playing 40-50 college football games for free, are the fans entitled to be upset if a player declines to play one more game for free?" -- the answer is obviously no.
We're talking about postseason games that are just exhibitions. Each player has the right to choose to play in the Whatever Bowl, or the NIT, or not. Another way to think of it is, from the perspective of a future NFL or NBA player, "What am I getting out of this, playing these games for nothing?" Their answer might be, probably should be, "It's an audition for professional jobs." If a player has played 40-50 college football games, or 30-plus college basketball games, he might decide that he's already done well in his auditions, and doesn't need one more. Or he might decide that he loves playing so much that he'll play any game he can get into, whether it's the Whatever Bowl or something equally meaningful, like a pickup basketball game at the park. Either way, I'm fine with it.
Players skipping games that are exhibitions actually doesn't bother me. I don't blame the kids for looking out for their future in those circumstances. And as someone pointed out the other day, coaches do the same thing every time they switch jobs. I realize there is a business side to the game and I'm fine with that. People have to make a living...it's what makes the world go 'round
However, I do miss the days when players wouldn't consider skipping the bowl games because they actually meant something more than just production for a TV network.
With that said, my only contention with your premise is that college players are entertaining their fans for free. Nobody works for free. Players sign up for college athletics voluntarily and always have. If they think they're getting screwed then they are free to walk away at any time. The reason they fall all over themselves to sign the contract is because it's actually a pretty good deal for them. It probably should be a slightly better deal in some respects and I'm all for anything that helps the players short of upending the system and paying them as professionals, but it's still a pretty good deal nonetheless.
That and on some level, fans are entitled to be upset as long they're the ones footing the bill. Fans buy the tickets, watch the games, buy the merchandise, and make the donations.
The problem isn't the fans being upset or the players skipping the games for that matter. The problem is that there are people outside the game(TV networks mostly) who are more interested in making money than they are in what's best for the game.
When did bowls ever mean something in a way that players wouldn't consider skipping them? The change isn't with the bowls or the bowl system. The change is with how much money is potentially available to the players after they turn pro. Years ago, the financial stakes were much lower for players.
Years ago Ken D the players used the bowls (which were much fewer in number) as national exposure to enhance their draft status. The kids whose schools didn't make the bowls hoped for an invitation to the Senior Bowl, the East West Shrine Game, or the Blue Gray Classic where they could pick up their first checks for playing and still showcase their talents. I remember freezing by butt off in December at Crampton Bowl watching the Blue Gray Classic and counting the number of pro scouts that were there for all of the events.
Now the pro scouts do their evaluation at the combines. Things have radically changed. All Star games are now passe and a risk of injury and so all bowls but the CFP are as well. Auburn's All American Corner Back skipped the bowl game yesterday and a healed Cam Pettway skipped it altogether and will likely declare for the draft.
Now if we move to a pay model for the upper tier and sign contracts instead of grants in aid then all of this will go away. Players will contractually be bound to the schools for the entire season and post season. Otherwise, we need to play the CFP games during the holidays and move all bowls to pre season kickoff classics.
Agreed... also the pro scouts use the videotape of every CFB game to scout the players they are interested in. For every player a team is seriously looking at, they'll have a "mix tape" with that player's highlights so that several people in the organization can watch the tape and weigh in. It's all far more diligent and sophisticated than it was "back in the day".
|
|
01-02-2018 05:49 PM |
|