Teammates: Davis made decision to sit out

[McLoofus 35,182]

Regarding the meaningless thing: no, the bowl games are not meaningless. But within the context of this season for Auburn, you have to consider what a let down it was to be there instead of the playoffs. It's not like we were a bunch of scrappy youngsters who were lucky to be in the SECCG and lost a close one to a favored opponent. We went into Atlanta as the favored team and got dragged by a team we'd already beaten. Not only that, but both our main rivals were in the playoffs and we weren't. The game wasn't meaningless, but it was a massive letdown. 

As for that foxhole crap, shove it. Davis was in a whole bunch of metaphorical foxholes for the last 3 years and he had his teammates' metaphorical six in every one of them. Jesus. Dude makes one decision that wads y'all's panties and suddenly it's like he never did anything good for Auburn. Sure as hell don't want anybody like *that* in *my* foxhole. 

[Barnacle 9,064]

10 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

If he wouldn’t lay it on the line for for his buds in a football game because he is scared of the repercussions of possible injury, he doesn’t belong in a combat MOS and be would probably know that going in

 

Laying it all on the line for the greater good beyond the individual and brotherhood are the similarities. Don’t make it a football= firefights thing. It’s not.

I didn't make the analogy. I'm criticizing it. Mikey said that he wouldn't trust Carlton Davis in a foxhole during a shooting War.

And, I understand the parallels between a unit and a team. I understand the mutual concept of Brotherhood and laying it on the line, so to speak. However, we are not talking about a player who was too scared to play in his first football game. This is a player who has laid it on the line time and time again.  Do we discount all of those games? Do you think his teammates in the NFL or going to be worried about him laying it on the line for them because he sat out of the Peach Bowl? Serious question.

[AUsince72 11,084]

I'm comfortable enough in my own skin to admit that football, to me, is entertainment.  Therefore if I were King of the World, I'd make college football cater to what I think is right and all players would have to play unless injured/sick/etc and they'd have to play all 4 seasons they're eligible.  Cuz I want to be entertained.

BUT, in the real world....where we all actually live....I suspect 99.9% of us, when faced with a decision to preserve GUARANTEED millions of dollars or risk it all to play in a game that (c'mon, clearly...be honest) everybody was disappointed to even be playing (as evidence on the field proves), would choose preserving the $$.

Yes, even those of us complaining about generational differences (yes, that's me) and claiming they wouldn't abandon their pee-wee teammates for a date with Curly-Sue.

And to compare a decision to stick with "amateur" sports vs getting paid millions to a tactical decision in the field of battle to leave your comrades behind to face actual death without you is...well C'MON MAN!!

The only thing truly left to hold a grudge against Carlton is that he never gave us one of these:

 

[aujeff11 6,243]

1 minute ago, Barnacle said:

This is a player who has laid it on the line time and time again.  Do we discount all of those games?

I did well over 100 escort and assist missions. And believe it or not, the last mission is the most important one after the first one. Soldiers feel like they are halfway home and the unsettling thought of getting injured on the last mission occurs to many soldiers. There are several times when you hear horror war stories, the unit was ambushed and the lamentation is often “we were almost home.”  The  soldiers cannot be like “nah, I’ll pass” on going on the last mission. 

 

5 minutes ago, Barnacle said:

Do you think his teammates in the NFL or going to be worried about him laying it on the line for them because he sat out of the Peach Bowl? Serious question.

The NFL is a business. Players don’t practice and play for weeks because of contract disputes. 

... I can imagine some of the Auburn players and coaches ( the brotherhood part) wanted him to play but what can they say?

[Mikey 16,578]

1 hour ago, TigerTale said:

I agree that in the future we will see star players opt out of games against lesser opponents in the regular season. They will deem these games meaningless just as they deem bowl games meaningless and what's the point of playing in a meaningless game where the risk of injury exists?

But once you start down the road of meaningless games, and keep in mind we are talking about meaningless to the player not the fan, where does it end? I believe it will diminish the game and fans and players alike will be disappointed.

I don't think that will happen because the coach will kick them off the team. For the last game of the player's last season the coach can't do much to a slacker. Before that, the coach can and will show him the door.

[Barnacle 9,064]

10 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

I did well over 100 escort and assist missions. And believe it or not, the last mission is the most important one after the first one. Soldiers feel like they are halfway home and the unsettling thought of getting injured on the last mission occurs to many soldiers. There are several times when you hear horror war stories, the unit was ambushed and the lamentation is often “we were almost home.”  The  soldiers cannot be like “nah, I’ll pass” on going on the last mission. 

 

The NFL is a business. Players don’t practice and play for weeks because of contract disputes. 

To me it's all about what's at stake and that's where I don't see the example you are giving as being comparable. And again, I've never been in a situation where the ultimate sacrifice was on the line. So, I am absolutely going to defer to you on anything having to do with speaking from that vantage point. I guess my point is, soldiers are literally risking their lives for each other. If one soldier decides not to do his job it literally puts the lives of his fellow soldiers at risk, when everything is on the line. I don't see the Reliance or the risk as being comparable, not even relative to football. That's the distinction I'm trying to make.

But, it's not even 8:00 and I've almost spent me daily quota of talking about things I know nothing about so I'll just leave it at that. 

I have a lot of respect for guys in the military and I don't want to skirt the line of being disrespectful. 

[Mikey 16,578]

8 hours ago, DAG said:

Because that was a personal conversation . Clearly he was close enough to share that with them. If Carlton Davis wanted to share that with the media then he would’ve done so. That wasn’t for them to share. They got baited and fell for it. Locker room/personal stuff should not be going to the media. In my field, the way you are acting , that is called being catty. That is the stuff they do on reality tv shows. You know? Things like the real housewives. A better thing to have done would be to take the high road and simply say Carton Davis was a great player for Auburn. He will be a great player for any NFL team who drafted him and I wish him the best . Or better yet, you direct them to Carlton Davis to answer that.

Davis's decision wasn't locker room talk and there was no "personal conversation" about it. He made a choice that had a negative effect on his teammates. The "high road" would have been for Davis to publicly state that he wasn't going to play because he had a big paycheck coming and didn't want to jeopardize the big bucks. Once he dumped on his team by bailing out, whatever flack he takes for trying to hide his reason behind flu season is deserved.

[aujeff11 6,243]

8 minutes ago, Barnacle said:

To me it's all about what's at stake and that's where I don't see the example you are giving as being comparable

I agree.... There is no similarity between a soldier and a future NFL player regarding what is at stake. For one, it’s health and death, and for the other, it’s money. The similarity between football and the military is when one takes what is at stake and leaves it on the line.

[WarDamnEagleWDE 12,737]

Davis wasn't the only player who chose not to play in that game.  

[McLoofus 35,182]

8 minutes ago, WarDamnEagleWDE said:

Davis wasn't the only player who chose not to play in that game.  

[TigerTale 357]

8 minutes ago, WarDamnEagleWDE said:

Davis wasn't the only player who chose not to play in that game.  

Crap...we just can't catch a break.

[bigbird 60,512]

37 minutes ago, Mikey said:

I don't think that will happen because the coach will kick them off the team. For the last game of the player's last season the coach can't do much to a slacker. Before that, the coach can and will show him the door.

Slacker? Good Lord!

[McLoofus 35,182]

6 minutes ago, bigbird said:

Slacker? Good Lord!

You didn't know? He's been doing nothing the last few years except laying around the athletic dorms, only getting up on occasion to eat free food and count free scholarship dollars. 

[Mikey 16,578]

6 minutes ago, bigbird said:

Slacker? Good Lord!

Do you like selfish better? Poor teammate? What's your adjective of choice for a guy that puts himself first and his team second?

[aujeff11 6,243]

1 minute ago, McLoofus said:

You didn't know? He's been doing nothing the last few years except laying around the athletic dorms, only getting up on occasion to eat free food and count free scholarship dollars. 

You must be talking about our backup OL. I can see why you’re confused because it’s so easy to be done! 

[McLoofus 35,182]

3 minutes ago, Mikey said:

Do you like selfish better? Poor teammate? What's your adjective of choice for a guy that puts himself first and his team second?

How about "provider".

[bigbird 60,512]

2 minutes ago, Mikey said:

Do you like selfish better? Poor teammate? What's your adjective of choice for a guy that puts himself first and his team second?

In this instance...

 

First round draft pick

Millionaire

Effective utilization of risk/reward

3 year starter

All-american

 

 

[steeleagle 2,945]

What if our team had 2-3 potential first rounders? Let's say hypothetically, it was our QB, RB and CB. And all say out the bowl game bc they didnt want to take a chance of hurting their 1st round projection.

Would we still say, I accept that? Hell, no. So whether it was 1 or 3 players, to not play is being too selfish. I understand Davis thinking about it, but he could just as well gotten a blown knee in practice or warmups (and guys have had this happen).

How many plays is he actually going to be involved with? maybe 10-12? 

I just don't agree with someone who has been a team player for 3 years to decide to sit out his last game. 

[lionheartkc 6,150]

I just had an interesting thought. The majority of coaches get bonuses for winning their bowl games. When players decide they aren't going to play, it can effect that outcome and cost the coaches money. It will be interesting to see if, sometime in the future, a coach with a particularly loathsome personality decides to take issue with players costing him a payday and pursues reparations. Technically, if it became a legal issue, the coach would win, because the player signed a contract that says they agree to play ball in exchange for a scholarship, and it absolutely damages the coach's income (not that any coach at a level where a kid would do this needs more money).

[McLoofus 35,182]

8 minutes ago, steeleagle said:

What if our team had 2-3 potential first rounders? Let's say hypothetically, it was our QB, RB and CB. And all say out the bowl game bc they didnt want to take a chance of hurting their 1st round projection.

Would we still say, I accept that? Hell, no. So whether it was 1 or 3 players, to not play is being too selfish. I understand Davis thinking about it, but he could just as well gotten a blown knee in practice or warmups (and guys have had this happen).

How many plays is he actually going to be involved with? maybe 10-12? 

I just don't agree with someone who has been a team player for 3 years to decide to sit out his last game. 

Why do y'all keep making up hypotheticals that are nothing like this situation?

What does a QB sitting out have to do with a CB sitting out? 

How on earth does being a team player for 3 years make one self-interested decision worse?  Would it be better if Davis was a me-first guy all this time?

If he's only involved in 10-12 plays, then why should anyone care any more about him not being in the game than he should about risking his future?

Folks just trying to find reasons to be mad. At an Auburn guy. "Fans". "Family". Whatever. 

[DAG 33,980]

3 hours ago, Gowebb11 said:

I get your point, but part of becoming an adult is taking accountability for your decisions. What he did is not groundbreaking or unique. Two examples from last year are Fournette and McCaffrey. They made a decision and made it public. I believe CD should’ve done the same. We would’ve been discussing this in December instead of late January. I hope he goes in the first round and makes a fortune though. 

How did he not take accountability for his decision? CD has done absolutely nothing wrong nor has he said anything. It’s a group of adults behind a computer who seems to have an issue about it. He made a grown up decision for his future, assuming he chose to sit out . As another adult, you can either accept it or not accept it, but to sit here and make a big fuss about it because he didn’t do what you THINK you would’ve done in that position is kid stuff.  Most of you guys, if you saw CD walking down the street right now wouldn’t say anything to him as an adult. If you saw him, would you hold him accountable as an adult and auburn fan? If not then you shouldn’t be complaining.

[McLoofus 35,182]

2 minutes ago, lionheartkc said:

I just had an interesting thought. The majority of coaches get bonuses for winning their bowl games. When players decide they aren't going to play, it can effect that outcome and cost the coaches money. It will be interesting to see if, sometime in the future, a coach with a particularly loathsome personality decides to take issue with players costing him a payday and pursues reparations. Technically, if it became a legal issue, the coach would win, because the player signed a contract that says they agree to play ball in exchange for a scholarship, and it absolutely damages the coach's income (not that any coach at a level where a kid would do this needs more money).

You sure about that? Honest question. I've never seen the paperwork. 

If the players do in fact have some sort of legal obligation to play that goes beyond them potentially forfeiting their scholarship, then the system is even more heavily flawed to their detriment than I thought and I would once again have to question my allegiance to this sport.

Put another way, what you're suggesting is majorly f***ed up. Not the possibility that a coach might actually pursue that kind of action, but the possibility that it would be even remotely possible from a legal perspective. 

[bigbird 60,512]

And if presented with the same decision, millionaire or play one last game, I'm pretty confident which the majority, if being honest, would take.

[DAG 33,980]

I mean we got one guy talking about how he couldn’t be in a foxhole with him. Rush propst much? Yet, supports a guy tooth and nail who is all about money and elevated position status. Doesn’t make sense to me.  CD, for the last 3 years, have his body and soul to AU. As a freshman, he was one of the few bright spots during that terrible 2015 year. The nerve of some of these people in here IMO.

[aujeff11 6,243]

12 minutes ago, lionheartkc said:

I just had an interesting thought. The majority of coaches get bonuses for winning their bowl games. When players decide they aren't going to play, it can effect that outcome and cost the coaches money. It will be interesting to see if, sometime in the future, a coach with a particularly loathsome personality decides to take issue with players costing him a payday and pursues reparations. Technically, if it became a legal issue, the coach would win, because the player signed a contract that says they agree to play ball in exchange for a scholarship, and it absolutely damages the coach's income (not that any coach at a level where a kid would do this needs more money).

 I love your interesting thoughts. Those that think Carlton was right to sit out a meaningless game probably shouldn’t complain about Malzahn’s bowl record