Started By
Message
Will NFL prospect upperclassmen eventually start sitting out regular season games?
Posted on 9/14/26 at 12:49 pm
Posted on 9/14/26 at 12:49 pm
I don't really understand why sitting out bowl games is considered acceptable, but sitting out regular season games isn't considered acceptable.
Like guys will even sit out the very best non-playoff bowls nowadays. ND cancelled their bowl game last year because their players were all going to sit out a #13 vs #14 matchup vs BYU.
Even worse, there were guys sitting out Big Six Bowl games in the 4 team playoff days. Like I seem to recall a bunch of UGA players sitting out the 2020-21 Peach Bowl vs Cinncinatti. (UGA won anyway.) And there's the even bigger example of the December 2023 Orange Bowl, which was a #5 vs #6 matchup where FSU had the chance to prove they got snubbed. Instead, something like 12 FSU players chose to sit out the game. And Brock Bowers and perhaps 1 or 2 other players were sitting out for UGA, although they weren't as decimated as FSU was. The result was a 63-3 UGA win.
So, why is it considered acceptable to sit out even the best non-playoff bowls, but not acceptable to sit out regular season games? Like it's not even considered acceptable to sit out the last 2 regular season games if your team is 2-8?
If it's acceptable to sit out any non-playoff bowl, it should be acceptable to sit out the rest of the regular season once your team falls out of playoff contention. Once a team suffers its 3rd regular season loss, it should be considered acceptable to sit out the rest of the regular season.
Like guys will even sit out the very best non-playoff bowls nowadays. ND cancelled their bowl game last year because their players were all going to sit out a #13 vs #14 matchup vs BYU.
Even worse, there were guys sitting out Big Six Bowl games in the 4 team playoff days. Like I seem to recall a bunch of UGA players sitting out the 2020-21 Peach Bowl vs Cinncinatti. (UGA won anyway.) And there's the even bigger example of the December 2023 Orange Bowl, which was a #5 vs #6 matchup where FSU had the chance to prove they got snubbed. Instead, something like 12 FSU players chose to sit out the game. And Brock Bowers and perhaps 1 or 2 other players were sitting out for UGA, although they weren't as decimated as FSU was. The result was a 63-3 UGA win.
So, why is it considered acceptable to sit out even the best non-playoff bowls, but not acceptable to sit out regular season games? Like it's not even considered acceptable to sit out the last 2 regular season games if your team is 2-8?
If it's acceptable to sit out any non-playoff bowl, it should be acceptable to sit out the rest of the regular season once your team falls out of playoff contention. Once a team suffers its 3rd regular season loss, it should be considered acceptable to sit out the rest of the regular season.
This post was edited on 9/14/26 at 12:51 pm
6
Posted on 9/14/26 at 12:52 pm to UFFan
I believe Jamarr Chase was the first player to opt out of an entire season in order to concentrate on the NFL draft. So to answer your question it has already happened.
Posted on 9/14/26 at 12:55 pm to UFFan
LSU started that at their place yrs ago.
Posted on 9/14/26 at 1:04 pm to captdalton
quote:
I believe Jamarr Chase was the first player to opt out of an entire season in order to concentrate on the NFL draft
He did. But circumstances were a bit different but yes he did sit out in '20. Worked out for him too.
Posted on 9/14/26 at 1:07 pm to UFFan
But, they're paid now. I can see sitting out a meaningless bowl game. But, not a regular season game. The way things are going, who knows?
This post was edited on 9/14/26 at 1:08 pm
Posted on 9/14/26 at 1:21 pm to GaryGator
There was some conjecture when NIL started that NIL would end the trend of players sitting out bowl games because sitting out the bowl game would be a violation of the NIL contract. But it's hardly turned out that way in the least. So, if sitting out the bowl game apparently doesn't violate the NIL contract, I don't see why sitting out regular season games would violate the NIL contract either.
I guess it theoretically might violate the NIL contract if you literally sit out all 12 games of the regular season. But, based on the standard that's already been set where players are still allowed to sit out bowl games, it seems like you'd be in compliance with NIL as long as you play at least one game during the season. And I'm suggesting that players continue playing until their team loses 3 games, which would mean the player would play at least 3 games.
I guess it theoretically might violate the NIL contract if you literally sit out all 12 games of the regular season. But, based on the standard that's already been set where players are still allowed to sit out bowl games, it seems like you'd be in compliance with NIL as long as you play at least one game during the season. And I'm suggesting that players continue playing until their team loses 3 games, which would mean the player would play at least 3 games.
This post was edited on 9/14/26 at 2:04 pm
Posted on 9/14/26 at 1:25 pm to GaryGator
quote:
But, they're paid now. I can see sitting out a meaningless bowl game. But, not a regular season game. The way things are going, who knows?
There are so many things in college athletics now which were unthinkable 2 and 5 and 10 seasons ago there is nothing that would be astonishing which could happen going forward. When TT tried to roster a degenerate gambler you would have thought that would have caused enough attention to make some changes. That will seem like nothing 10 years from now if something doesn't change....
Posted on 9/14/26 at 1:34 pm to AwgustaDawg
Yeah. Sitting out bowl games itself seemed unthinkable when Christian McCaffrey did that in the December 2016 Sun Bowl. It was hugely controversial at the time even though it wasn't even that prestigious of a bowl game. He was like the only CFB player who did it that bowl season.
Then, just 2 years later, in the 2018-19 bowl season, there were opt outs all over the place in almost every non-playoff bowl game.
Anyway, this theory of players sitting out regular season games isn't really new. In fact, that actually was one of the main arguments that people were making against McCaffrey's decision to sit out the bowl in 2016. If seniors can sit out a bowl game, then why can't seniors sit out regular season games? That argument about players sitting out the regular season seems to be forgotten now, and I seem to be the only person that remembers that argument from 10 years ago. But that's actually where I got the idea of this thread from.
Then, just 2 years later, in the 2018-19 bowl season, there were opt outs all over the place in almost every non-playoff bowl game.
Anyway, this theory of players sitting out regular season games isn't really new. In fact, that actually was one of the main arguments that people were making against McCaffrey's decision to sit out the bowl in 2016. If seniors can sit out a bowl game, then why can't seniors sit out regular season games? That argument about players sitting out the regular season seems to be forgotten now, and I seem to be the only person that remembers that argument from 10 years ago. But that's actually where I got the idea of this thread from.
This post was edited on 9/14/26 at 1:40 pm
Posted on 9/14/26 at 1:42 pm to UFFan
I know there are various legal hurdles first, but we've seriously got to get some sort of salary cap and performance guarantees (like availability) in place contractually, across the board.
Still operating with inconsistent rosters, bulk transfers, and weekly litigation challenges in 2026 is absurd.
Still operating with inconsistent rosters, bulk transfers, and weekly litigation challenges in 2026 is absurd.
Posted on 9/14/26 at 4:19 pm to UFFan
Bump
Posted on 9/14/26 at 9:41 pm to UFFan
quote:
There was some conjecture when NIL started that NIL would end the trend of players sitting out bowl games because sitting out the bowl game would be a violation of the NIL contract .
As of right now this can't happen, because the NCAA will not allow NIL to be tied to a player's decision to play for any particular school (even though we all know that that is exactly what it is).
Posted on 9/14/26 at 9:59 pm to UFFan
No doubt it is coming. Again…the same idiots who think it is acceptable
To sit bowl games…are the same ones who thought allowing players to transfer was the right thing to do. Some numb skulls never see the unintended consequences.
To sit bowl games…are the same ones who thought allowing players to transfer was the right thing to do. Some numb skulls never see the unintended consequences.
Posted on 9/14/26 at 10:00 pm to GaryGator
Does the pay end if they get injured? That is how they will do it…and are already doing it.
Posted on 9/14/26 at 10:02 pm to captdalton
Typical LSU player that doesn’t give a shite about the program, only there for me, myself and I
Posted on 9/14/26 at 10:02 pm to UFFan
You can’t prove a player is t injured. There back will be hurt. Once you opened that door with bowl games…it’s there for any game.
Posted on 9/14/26 at 11:22 pm to TheTideMustRoll
quote:
As of right now this can't happen, because the NCAA will not allow NIL to be tied to a player's decision to play for any particular school (even though we all know that that is exactly what it is).
I can’t believe there wouldn’t be a way to finesse this in an NIL contract. Even though NIL in actuality is pay to play, the fiction is that it is a contract beneficial to the payor as well as the athlete, eg. I pay Chambliss because I sell more Wheaties if I can put him on the cover of the box. Would I sell the same amount of boxes of Wheaties if people lost interest in him because he doesn’t play as much??? Seems like I’d like to have some protection against that if I’m General Mills.
Idk…but the way they’ve tortured NIL contracts so far to fit the fiction, is this really that much more of a reach?
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News