By Owen Fallon
It was that time of year again, every college football fanatic’s favorite month-long stretch. It was bowl season. This past season, 44 bowl games were provided to teams with at least seven wins. These bowls are put on by large-scale companies or committees that seek to make money from advertisements, while also allowing successful teams to have their own championship at the end of the year. Every year there are a number of college players who decide to forego their bowl game in an effort to preserve themselves for the NFL draft. Usually, these players are considered high draft picks who have serious money and potential at stake. With this year’s list at 29 players skipping bowl games (14 of which were considered top 50 prospects), there was no shortage of controversy.
The stem of the controversy resides in the severe bowl inflation that college football has experienced over the past 50 years. In 1970, there were just 11 bowl games. In 2000, there were 25, and now there are a total of 44, making a bowl game is no longer an impressive feat, especially for top-notch programs. For these big programs, the only goal is to reach the college football playoffs, in which only four teams are selected. When this goal isn’t met, players who are considered candidates for the NFL draft later in the year have a decision to make. Do you forgo the now watered-down bowl game, or do you risk the chance of getting injured for playing with your team one last time?
Many conferences and journalists have called for the expansion of the playoffs to give more colleges the opportunity. This year, there were 0 opt-outs in the college playoffs between Georgia, Alabama, Michigan, and Cincinnati. These four teams had many top prospects, such as Aidan Hutchinson, Nakobe Dean, Jameson Williams, and Desmond Ridder. However, in this year’s Rose Bowl between Ohio State and Utah (the two highest-graded teams not in the playoffs), four players opted out from playing for Ohio State. Moreover, college players find enough worth in winning the CFB championship but not in other bowl games. With the expansion of the playoffs, more players would have an opportunity to win the CFB championship, hence decreasing the number of opt-outs.
Kirk Herbstreit, a former Ohio State quarterback and current ESPN, analyst weighed in on the situation as an opponent to the opt-out. He stated, “I just don’t buy into this narrative of meaningless bowl games. These teams have always had goals of getting to the championship, and it doesn’t happen all that often, but you don’t throw in the towel and say, ‘Well, we didn’t accomplish our goals.’’’ He went on to say, “I don’t know if changing (the playoff) or expanding it is going to change anything. I really don’t. I just think this era of football players just doesn’t love football.”
Herbstreit was under fire for many days after his remarks. He was deemed “out of touch” by many reporters and players. Herbstriert’s remarks were so impactful because of his occupation. He’s the face of college football broadcasting. He works for ESPN, the network that airs 41 of the 44 of the bowl games. If there are fewer top players playing in these bowls, the games become less interesting, hence decreasing the number of viewers. Simply put, less money goes into ESPN’s pockets from these players deciding not to play. It’s easy to see why Herbstreit would be against players opting out.
As the controversy and public debate were at an all-time high, Matt Corral, a top NFL quarterback prospect for the University of Mississippi, decided to opt into his bowl game and had to be carted off the field due to an injury. Luckily for Corral, it was just a sprained ankle and shouldn’t have any effect on his draft stock. However, there are many others not as lucky as Corral. Former Notre Dame star linebacker Jaylon Smith and former Michigan star tight end Jake Butt both tore their ACL in their final bowl games in 2016 and 2017, respectively. This caused both of their draft stocks to plummet, and each potentially lost out on millions of dollars in contract negotiations. These two incidents sparked an unintended fire that would change the landscape of college football forever. The next year, top running back prospects Leonard Fournette (Louisiana State University) and Christian McCaffrey (Stanford) pioneered the trend and decided to forgo their respective bowl games.
Opinions from the public vary, as each side has its fair share of valid arguments. College football fan and Collegiate varsity football defensive back Reid Coleman (’22) states that, “Players have a figurative contract with their team to finish out their season, and it shows a lack of commitment from them.” Similar to Herbstreit’s, Coleman’s opinion is widely shared among fans. However, Aaron Rodgers, the Green Bay Packers NFL quarterback, has more empathy for the players, stating “I think it’s those kids’ decision. There’s a lot to be said about the pride of playing, but it’s a different ballgame in 2021, 2022 than it was back in 2004.” Rodgers notes the changes college football has made as money has become significantly more involved in decision-making.
Varsity player Sam Evins (22’) also notes the changes in college football, “I understand and respect the decision to opt-out, but I think it is a statement that speaks to where the college football game is today. Before the playoffs were created, there was no talk of opting out of ‘meaningless bowl games,’ and now due to the marketing around the sport and only focusing on the playoffs, it has become a sad reality.”
It is undeniable that top prospects make the bowl games more interesting and captivating for viewers and fans, but at what cost? Or is there a lack of pride from the modern-day college football player? As an increasing number of players decide to opt-out of games, the NCAA is seemingly left with many decisions to make.
Recent Comments