Looks like Cross is opting out of Liberty Bowl
- Thread starter Leeshouldveflanked
- Start date
There wasn't a precedent for players sitting out bowls until they just started doing it. I think you'll see the regular season opt outs happening soon unless NIL deals require that they play out their eligibility. I think you are seeing quasi opt outs now, with some players maybe not playing through injuries they would have before. At some point, a first round draft pick at a place like LSU or A&M is going to look up in November and realize they aren't going to the SEC Championship game or a NY6 bowl and decide they don't want to risk their draft status. After it happens a few times and isn't shown to hurt their draft, then you'll see it become more common.
I do think we are slightly at lower risk than other programs for this because in addition to not having as many draft picks, our players probably didn't come to state with the idea of playoffs or bust, so they may be less inclined to sit out regular season games.
So, in other words, I don't owe you or anybody else on this board research or answers you can get yourself with a simple google search. Don't blame your laziness on me...I owe you nothing.
That said, for any others interested here's just a quick hit from a google search:
"Some pro prospects in college football are reaching into their own pockets and taking out sizable loans in order to offset the cost of permanent and total disability policies and loss-of-value insurance riders that would typically be paid for in large part by a fund distributed to schools by the NCAA."
"One prospect from a Big 12 school, who spoke to ESPN on the condition of anonymity, said he was told before the pandemic that the college he attends would be covering the entirety of the premium for his permanent and total disability policy, which cost approximately $30,000 and would provide him $3 million in coverage if he were to sustain a career-ending injury. "
"Keith Lerner of Total Planning Sports Services in Gainesville, Florida, wrote policies for Florida State's Jameis Winston, Oregon's Marcus Mariota, Georgia's Todd Gurley, Miami's Frank Gore and others in the past. The Winston insurance package was reportedly $10 million -- $5 million in disability and $5 million in loss of value -- and Florida State paid a $55,000 premium for one year of coverage during Winston's sophomore season in 2014, a year after he guided the Seminoles to a national championship and won the Heisman Trophy."
"Brokers said players they've dealt with from the SEC have had a less difficult time securing funding from their schools. According to SEC associate commissioner Herb Vincent, the conference's executive committee made the decision this year to fund the SAF at the same levels as last year, using the unrestricted revenues provided by the NCAA."
Cross may be a stud O-lineman, but he is also a *****.
And why would you assume practice/training for the bowl game by the staff that was instrumental in helping you create your NFL value, would be significantly worse than quitting and training by yourself during that time? Why would you assume Cross would not also be able to do extra training on his own outside the team?
This is not the "A-B" proposition you make it out to be.
If Cross were my son, he'd have insurance policies in place that would pay him $ millions for either loss of career or loss of value. He already gets some through MSU via the NCAA, I'd supplement it with additional coverage, even if I had to take out a loan or HELOC costing $100,000 or more. 1st-rd picks average $18.75 million for the first 4 years of an initial contract. $10.875 million on average is paid up front as a signing bonus. Around $100,000 would buy enough insurance to cover that. Since these players have a known draft projection the insurance companies use, they insure the player because they know the odds of a catastrophic injury in one game are so low that even if it happens to a player, the vast majority of other players insured who do not end with a claim makes the potential losses more than acceptable.
So, whether the kid gets hurt or not, it comes down to a cost of $100,000 out of a $10 million signing bonus (and out of an $18.5 million 4-year deal). If he doesn't need to make a claim (the far more likely scenario), he'd be taking home $9,900,000 in signing bonus rather than 10,000,000, and $18,650,000 in 4-year salary instead of $18,750,000.
So yeah, I'd without question make sure my son was covered that way, and tell him quitting on his teammates is a sign of poor character. It looks like greed. While $100,000 is a lot for most of us on this board, against $18,000,000 it's chicken-****. I would not advise my son to sell his integrity so cheaply.
Last edited:
Maybe their scholarship should state that if they opt out of games, (bowl or otherwise), or get themselves kicked off the team, they will owe the university their scholarship money back. After all they are paid contract employees of the Athletic program.
Multiple reasons this would be a very bad idea. One being that you can't do that. You couldn't enforce it even if you could. It would be a very bad look for every 4* and 5* kid you're trying to recruit. And you'd seriously piss off a soon to be very rich and well-known alumnus. I don't like it, be we have to face the fact that outside the playoffs and NY6 bowls, all the rest of the bowls are just exhibitions. Heck, we even had a head coach of a team very much in playoff contention leave his team a week before the playoffs were even announced. There's just no good solution to the month gap between the end of the regular season and the bowl games.
It's hilarious you feel this strongly
It's the liberty bowl. I guarantee you his teammates are happy for him. Basically, you want Cross to pay 100k so you can be entertained in orange mound after paying 50 bucks for a ticket and a couple beers. Dance for me, boy!
It's the liberty bowl. I guarantee you his teammates are happy for him. Basically, you want Cross to pay 100k so you can be entertained in orange mound after paying 50 bucks for a ticket and a couple beers. Dance for me, boy!
Basically I believe people with integrity honor their commitments and don't quit on their team and teammates. You think saving $100,000 out of $18,750,000 is worth quitting on your team & teammates...not finishing? You don't think fans of the school have a right to expect him in every game he is healthy enough to play in, given he did accept the scholarship? You don't think it's fans who collectively make it possible for most of these guys to have a scholarship and possible subsequent career? Without the fans, the sport dies or gets reduced to club-level sports.
Yeah, every healthy athlete who accepted a scholarship should have an obligation, if not the personal integrity to stick with it until the season is over, including bowl games. The more we just decide to accept or even endorse this kind of behavior, the less surprised we should be when we see some of the carnage & ugliness that comes from players who have not been held to standards as they were in the past.
Call it old-fashioned...I call it integrity & good sportsmanship.
Oh, and for some context, $100,000 to a 1st rounder is like $500 to someone who makes $100,000 per year. Yeah, I think these young men should not skip a bowl game over that equivalent $500, especially when they aren't really even the ones paying all or maybe any of that themselves.
Last edited:
Funny how all the selfish folks are complaining about Cross being selfish. I mean to argue that a guy should play is because you are selfish and want the team to be at it's strongest to win to make you feel better.
And they might as well be complaining about which way the wind blows. College football has gone through a historical transformation in the last few years it's surprising how many just don't get it. For now and the foreseeable future the money comes first above all else for the players and coaches.
Oh yeah that sounds fair**....
You play and practice all season long for a sport that brings in millions in exchange for a scholarship worth a few thousand dollars and for many isn't worth that because they are only there to play football. Now you want them to have to give it all back because you opt out of one game? That kinda seems a little draconian to me. Here's an idea, when a player leaves the team kick them out of school. Oh wait, most of the bowl prep and the bowl game takes place long AFTER the semester has ended.
Football players are NOT paid contract employees any more than students on academic scholarship. I will agree though that it kind of seems that way because of the ridiculous hours and effort they must put in on their 'extracurricular activity' that other scholarship students don't including things like off season workouts, summer camp, and this bowl game that take place long BEFORE and AFTER the semester has ended!. BTW, do you advocate the same treatment for students on academic scholarships that leave school early?
You play and practice all season long for a sport that brings in millions in exchange for a scholarship worth a few thousand dollars and for many isn't worth that because they are only there to play football. Now you want them to have to give it all back because you opt out of one game? That kinda seems a little draconian to me. Here's an idea, when a player leaves the team kick them out of school. Oh wait, most of the bowl prep and the bowl game takes place long AFTER the semester has ended.
Football players are NOT paid contract employees any more than students on academic scholarship. I will agree though that it kind of seems that way because of the ridiculous hours and effort they must put in on their 'extracurricular activity' that other scholarship students don't including things like off season workouts, summer camp, and this bowl game that take place long BEFORE and AFTER the semester has ended!. BTW, do you advocate the same treatment for students on academic scholarships that leave school early?
Last edited:
Serious answer, yes, if they meet four criteria. 1. They are draft eligible 2. They are projected to be drafted 3. They plan on going in the draft. 4. They are unlikely to improve their draft position by playing the game.
That takes our starting QB out of the picture because he isn't draft eligible. Also must consider the hazard associated with the position. A QB might choose to play where a tackle or RB would not because of the level of contact and likelihood of injury.
Disagree. I'd say a good analogy might be is you are participating in a tug-o-war contest on the beach that's an annual event with prize money and bragging rights. You know all year or for years roughly when this contest will be. But on the week before the contest your anchor man says he's not going to participate because he has a job interview later and doesn't want to risk getting a bad sunburn.
Would it be selfish for you and/or any of your supporters to expect him to have bought sunscreen and put it on so he could participate, rather than force you to use someone not as good at the anchor? Or maybe it'd be right for you to be pissed because he could have taken care of the sunburn concern simply by buying sunscreen and putting it on the day of the contest, and for any preparatory practices beforehand.
With the bowl, consider we're talking about guys who are a lock for a contract in the $ millions, and who, if they pay the premium are guaranteed a payout close, or equal to the contract amount. Now consider, due to the upcoming contract and/or insurance payout, the effective relative cost to said players is about what $200-to-$500 would be to most on this board. Do you think it's selfish for supporters, a team and teammates to believe these players shouldn't quit on them over $200-to-$500? How about when you consider the NCAA and the school are likely paying at least half of that cost? So now we're talking about quitting on your team for what amounts to $0-to-$250 for most of us here.
Who are truly the selfish ones here?
Oh you're dead right about that. And it keeps getting worse as it becomes more common and more acceptable to a portion of the fans. That doesn't mean it isn't still something to ***** about and oppose in places like this.
Right your upset that guy isn't playing because you might lose. You don't really care if he gets sunburned as long as you win. If he get's sunburned and doesn't get the job because he looks like a red raccoon that's his fault and no skin off your nose because you won a meaningless tug-o-war.
Have you been drinking? Not making sense here, or you're trying too hard to make it about me. I've been quite clear my issue isn't about winning or losing, it is about integrity & sportsmanship. It's about doing the right thing. It's about accountability.
Why does it not occur to you that you can care about him getting sunburned, and still be pissed off he just decided not to participate rather than buy some sunscreen? In the analogy we/re talking about a guy who knows he can buy the sunscreen, but doesn't care enough about helping his team or honoring a commitment to even buy it, even if someone is paying for half of it...then he uses the excuse of not wanting to get a sunburn before the interview.
The excuse is total BS because there was a way to ensure he'd be fine if he did his part. And it was very easy to do. He just chose not to do it. So, everybody else who does care doesn't have a right to be ticked off, or even just call out the BS?
Last edited:
I'll save my judgment until I see if he says MSU or his high when they announce his name on Sunday night football.
Latest posts
Get unlimited access today.