4 OSU players declare for draft, opt out of Rose Bowl
All over the interwebs. The players are WRs Garrett Wilson and Chris Olave, OT Nicholas Petit-Frere, and DT Haskell Garrett.
Garrett was a 5th year senior out of eligibility after this game. Olave was a true senior with an extra year left due to COVID but was widely expected to declare since he's a likely 1st rounder. Wilson was a true junior with 2 years left but is also expected to be a first round pick. Petit-Frere is a RS Junior with two years left but is either a day 1 or day 2 pick as well.
December 27th, 2021 at 5:55 PM ^
NPT probably still working on how to explain to NFL scouts why he got put on his ass by Hutchinson all game
December 27th, 2021 at 6:02 PM ^
Did not help his cause
December 27th, 2021 at 6:02 PM ^
Just show the scouts his Drs note with 'Really, Really bad Flu' written in crayon.
December 27th, 2021 at 7:14 PM ^
Please excuse Nicholas from the Rose Bowl. He has a Really, Really bad Flu. See dr's note.
Petit-Frere's Mother
December 27th, 2021 at 9:30 PM ^
- Signed C.J. Stroud
December 28th, 2021 at 9:42 AM ^
Oh yeah, forgot about that...he's good. It was also a cool day with a little snow.. But that never happens in the NFL.
December 27th, 2021 at 7:15 PM ^
I get the injury risk, but if I were NPT the last thing I would want scouts to have in their minds is myself getting put on skates by the type of player you’re going to see 8-12x in an NFL season.
December 27th, 2021 at 7:39 PM ^
You actually see that type of player 17 times in the regular season
December 27th, 2021 at 7:58 PM ^
I haven't seen it but someone must have pointed out that Petit-Frere is French for "little brother."
December 27th, 2021 at 9:02 PM ^
I know (basic) French and somehow this has never crossed my mind?? Good call!
December 27th, 2021 at 5:56 PM ^
OSU players: "Fuck Ohio."
December 27th, 2021 at 5:56 PM ^
Damn - beaten by seconds!
December 27th, 2021 at 6:12 PM ^
Stick to swim lanes my friend ?
December 27th, 2021 at 8:37 PM ^
and yet you posted again anyway.
December 27th, 2021 at 5:56 PM ^
Going to be fun to watch them get SMOKED soon.
December 27th, 2021 at 5:57 PM ^
Bowl games had been successfully run for 100+ years without any significant opt outs or trivialization of the games - even with multiple concurrent decades of the NFL draft.
This relatively recent (and agent-driven) trend is killing college football tradition and collegiate spirit.
Greed is *not* good.
December 27th, 2021 at 6:05 PM ^
The whole system is built on greed and self-interest...so now the players are getting in on it.
I just look at is as an opportunity for the young guys/back ups to make their mark for next years team.
December 27th, 2021 at 6:19 PM ^
Disingenuous argument. The players have always been "getting in on it" - and with this NIL loophole it is even more pay-to-play than ever before. Quiting on one's team before the team is done playing (spin it however you want - it is *exactly* what they are doing), is not only selfish but not supported by sound reasoning and statistics.
I agree that it is an opportunity for the backups to get time, but it is also an insult to the rest of the team & kids who want to go out with a win yet may be denied because major contributors who are missing by choice.
December 27th, 2021 at 10:46 PM ^
Players opted out before NIL started. It started basically immediately after the playoffs were instituted. How is that the fault of the players? When there was a tradition of it and everybody had their one bowl game it made more sense. Now you play a one off exhibition game a month after the season and it doesn't seem to make any sense.
December 27th, 2021 at 6:15 PM ^
Or, all the bowl games except for 3 are now meaningless exhibitions and, after seeing what happened to players like our own Jake Butt, other players are realizing that the risk/reward ratio for playing in the bowl game is ZERO. There is literally no reward--only risk. Your team can't "win" anything. If you are already a top prospect, that one game won't get your drafted any higher. The only significant thing that can happen is that you get seriously injured and possibly ruin your chance at a big NFL contract.
The answer? Expand the playoffs. Do you see any players sitting out of the playoffs? Of course not. Because those games MEAN something.
December 27th, 2021 at 6:27 PM ^
This is exactly right. You can't blame the players for skipping an exhibition game after the season is over. It it was a game that was part of a National Championship tournament, they would be playing for sure.
FCS has a 24 team Championship tournament, Div-II has 28 teams, Div-III has 32 teams.
FBS? 4.
Which of these is not like the others?
December 27th, 2021 at 6:30 PM ^
Funny - they almost never skipped before the playoffs started, yet the bowl games themselves haven't changed. The "risk" to their draft stock was the same then as it it now, which is to say almost negligible.
December 27th, 2021 at 6:48 PM ^
Because before the playoffs started, the Bowl Games were a major factor in the final AP poll, which is essentially how everyone's season was rated.
Now, if you win the Rose Bowl, almost no one even cares because you weren't in the playoffs. It's basically an NIT game.
December 27th, 2021 at 9:36 PM ^
None of these arguments make sense. From a player's 1st round draft prospect, even playing in the CFP is a risk and a "meaningless" game as it will not help their draft status, but they could still get injured.
December 27th, 2021 at 6:52 PM ^
I'm not sure if you intended it, but you're making my point. Now that there is a playoff the bowl games don't matter, especially to players with clear professional potential and who have previously made the playoff.
If you want the bowl games to matter, make them part of the playoff.
I am old enough to remember when the NCAA Basketball tournament had 23 - 25 teams. Does anyone think it is worse now that it has 65 teams? Oh, and players - even entire teams - opt out of the NIT tournament these days.
December 27th, 2021 at 7:03 PM ^
Exactly. Teams have declined NIT bids because they just didn't care enough to play.
December 27th, 2021 at 8:18 PM ^
Players are just trying to better follow the example of their (former) coaches
December 27th, 2021 at 6:49 PM ^
The risk/reward be undefined and the reward/risk would be zero.
December 27th, 2021 at 7:03 PM ^
Lol touche. :)
I would argue the risk/reward could also be described as infinite. :)
December 27th, 2021 at 7:03 PM ^
"Literally no reward" for winning bowl game?? The Cheez It Bowl, I can understand... but a prestigious bowl like the Rose Bowl? You don't think there's any reward in winning it? The reward for winning one of those prestigious bowls is potentially becoming a legend. People remember the great performances and moments from the important bowls. Like the legendary Rose Bowl between Texas and Michigan. Neither team was playing for a championship, but that game will live on forever. I bet the players who played in that game are forever grateful that they played in it.
December 27th, 2021 at 7:07 PM ^
I remember the Texas-USC Rose Bowl game much better. I expect everyone does. Why? Because they were playing for a championship.
December 27th, 2021 at 7:10 PM ^
You are living in the past. No one cares now because it is a consolation prize. I guarantee absolutely no one on Ohio State WANTS to be in the Rose Bowl.
Before the playoff, there was no reasonable expectation to be in the 2-team BCS "title" game. Hell, you could be an undefeated major conference champ and get left out. Now, if you aren't in the playoffs, you are playing in a consolation game.
This can all easily be fixed by expanding the playoffs.
December 27th, 2021 at 7:17 PM ^
Another false argument - if "no one cared now" then people wouldn't be having this conversation at all.
December 27th, 2021 at 8:08 PM ^
I mean, "we wouldn't be having this conversation" is the disingenuous argument. After OSU got walloped by Michigan, their season was effectively over. Any player with an opportunity to get drafted should start prepping as opposed to playing an exhibition that rewards only television sponsors.
Seems like the vast majority of the people here take no issue with players sitting out of bowl games that have been rendered meaningless by the four-team playoff. The only reason this conversation is ongoing is because you and a few other people are perpetuating it.
December 27th, 2021 at 8:20 PM ^
Except that, even in those seasons we lost to osu, *most* of the draftable players did NOT sit out the bowl games. Clearly the opt-out trend was not widely shared by the players nor fanbase.
December 27th, 2021 at 8:30 PM ^
Also, if no one cared, then nobody would watch, which is definitely not the case. It’s just a fact of life that these non-playoff bowl games do not measure up to what they used to. They mean less, but they’re not meaningless. Expand the playoffs & reduce the regular season. No need for non-conference patsies anyway.
December 27th, 2021 at 7:06 PM ^
Or, all the bowl games except for 3 are now meaningless exhibitions
But that's the way it's been forever. In virtually every season prior to the playoffs, there were at most 3 bowl games that had a direct impact on who the national champion was going to be. The rest were every bit as meaningless as they are now.
For example, in 1988, the Fiesta Bowl had #1 ND against #3 West Virginia. The Orange Bowl pitted #2 Miami against #6 Nebraska. The eventual national champion was going to come out of one of those games.
If ND wins, they're national champs regardless of what happens in the Orange Bowl. If WVU upsets ND and Miami beats Nebraska, the nature of both victories determines whether it's Miami or WVU. If Nebraska beats Miami and WVU beats ND, the Mountaineers are national champs.
That meant that the Sugar Bowl between #4 Florida State and #7 Auburn was highly unlikely to affect who the NC was. The Cotton Bowl between #9 UCLA and #8 Arkansas had zero impact.
It also meant that the Rose Bowl between #11 Michigan and #5 USC also had no impact on who the national champion was. Same with the Sun Bowl, Gator Bowl, Citrus Bowl, Hall of Fame Bowl, Holiday Bowl, Freedom Bowl, Peach Bowl, All-American Bowl, Liberty Bowl, Aloha Bowl, Independence Bowl, and California Bowl—every damn one of those bowl games was a "meaningless exhibition" with literally zero impact on who the national champion was.
I don't recall any significant players on any of the Sugar Bowl, Cotton Bowl, or Rose Bowl teams opting out. Same with the 12 other bowl games.
What's changed since then?
December 27th, 2021 at 7:27 PM ^
What's changed since then? Well first and foremost, the Rose Bowl (this year) is now a consolation prize filled in by also-rans.
December 27th, 2021 at 7:40 PM ^
When the Big Ten had its idiotic no-repeat rule for the Rose Bowl, it was not uncommon for a conference champ to not play in the Rose Bowl, with the conference runner-up playing in the game instead. That's a consolation prize for an also-ran.
December 27th, 2021 at 7:55 PM ^
The Rose Bowl used to be THE BEST any Big Ten team could EVER do. Whether you were undefeated or 8-4, if you won the Big Ten, your TOP prize was playing in the Rose Bowl.
That is no longer true. Everything is relative. If you tell me the best I can EVER do is play in the Rose Bowl, then that makes it special. If you tell me that, well, maybe I could play in these better playoff bowls, but if I'm not really good enough then I can play in the Rose Bowl, then I stop caring about it any more than I care about the Citrus Bowl or the Alamo Bowl. Meaning I pretty much only care if my team is playing in it.
December 27th, 2021 at 8:16 PM ^
What changed is there were 17 bowl games then and like 40 today. Just making a bowl game used to actually be a reward. What changed is that making a particular bowl was a definitive goal for every team and a potential national championship flowed through that path. Now, the definitive goal is the playoffs and the only path to a national championship, with your bowl tie-ins being mere consolations. Perhaps most significantly what changed is that the media used to chart a race to a particular bowl game for each conference. Today, the media is so obsessed with playoff positioning that it gets discussed extensively in nearly every game all season long no matter if the teams have even a reasonable shot.
The atmosphere surrounding college football's postseason has changed dramatically. Fans only care about the playoffs. It's no wonder players have taken the same attitude.
December 28th, 2021 at 3:19 AM ^
YES! When fewer teams earned bids AND there were no playoffs, just the rankings, it was a bigger deal. I was a BC student the year Flutie won the Heisman and winning the Cotton Bowl was almost as big because it was the Cotton Bowl. A major bowl in a fun locale...or Dallas, whatever, was the finale to a great season. The number of bowls and the existence of the playoffs has drained that value. Plus, to me, the sponsorships add to this. The Jimmy Kimmel Bowl? The Carquest Bowl? Who'd risk an injury to win that when draft prep calls? NFL careers are short and your first contract is probably your only contract. Get injured in a bowl and you cost yourself millions that can't be recovered. That's a pretty rational assessment of injury risk/reward.
December 27th, 2021 at 8:38 PM ^
What's changed is that players now know they can opt out. While no one was forced to play in the past I don't recall any players sitting out until recently and since it's been done players have realized it's an option to not participate in something they decide is irrelevant to their success as a professional.
It seems similar to many other careers in that respect.
December 27th, 2021 at 8:44 PM ^
What changed was Jake Burr tearing his ACL in the 2016 Orange Bowl, effective ending his career and costing him millions of dollars.
December 28th, 2021 at 7:05 AM ^
Don, CRG,
One thing that’s changed is that the players are more aware of their options and have more ability to choose. In 1988 it would not have been culturally acceptable for a player to try to sit out and might have even had a negative impact on draft status as pro scouts would have raised “character issues, not a team player” type of concerns before the draft.
contracts are WAY bigger now and the NFL doesn’t care if you sit out. So they do. I would too.
December 27th, 2021 at 7:45 PM ^
I fail to understand that before we had the playoffs, and only 2 teams were eligible to win a NC with the BCS, the bowl games weren't meaningless, but as soon as we add only 2 more teams to the contention for a NC, all of the sudden they are meaningless? These games go in the record books as a W or L, and affect their overall ranking. Maybe these players should just start skipping out on the last games of the regular season if they are on a team that is no longer in contention for a championship, if this is the logic we are starting to use.
December 27th, 2021 at 6:17 PM ^
For student athletes, bowl games are meaningless. If they participate and win, maybe they get some cheesy ring or trophy. In return, they run the risk of injury that could cost them millions, or potentially their career.
December 27th, 2021 at 6:26 PM ^
Who is actually saying that? I have not once read a statement by any UM player (current or former) saying that their bowl game is "meaningless".
This is simply a false argument thrown out by persons trying to justify some kind of position (e.g. playoff expansion, player payments, fewer bowl games, etc.)
December 27th, 2021 at 6:37 PM ^
How’re you not understanding why a top collegiate athlete with their entire professional career may not want to play in a game that has -ZERO- effect in the grand scheme of things!? I agree it’s kind sad but nobody is reflecting on a couple good plays made in the Cheeze-It Bowl 2-5-10 years from now.
December 27th, 2021 at 6:50 PM ^
I understand the argument, but I don't buy it. The exact same arguments about "relevance" to their pro careers apply to all the previous 50+ years of the game... yet practically never stopped these kids from playing in their bowl games.
What has *truly* changed? If a "top collegiate athlete" is so thoroughly concerned about getting a draft stock hurt, they should opt out several months prior to the draft. Tearing an ACL or severely fracturing a leg in Dec isn't much different than doing it in Nov.
Look back at the stats of injury vs draft stock over the past 30+ years - they don't support this move. People can cherry-pick the exceptions all they want (e.g. Jake Butt), but that is an almost negligible anomaly.