CBS Mock Draft has Cross going 5th overall

[schddog72]

But he's selfish for letting his team down in the Memphis Bowl...*

Whether he's 1st, 5th, or 205th, yes he's still selfish for bailing out on his team.

[OLJWales]

Of course they are, but the farther society drifts away from the truth the more they will hate those that speak it. I just wish he weren?t so publicly vocal.

I'll go along with the vocal part. But we hired the KING of vocal. Asking Leach not to publicly vocal is like asking a dog who likes killing chickens to stop killing chickens. He doesn't know what the 17 your talking about.

[SPMT]

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/...ed-in-round-1/

Also, Coral the 1st QB taken and in the top 10 over Pickett

Hard for me to see Burks being the 3rd WR taken- but we'll see

Burns reminds me of Alston Jeffrey. Doesn?t look especially explosive. Uses body well though.

[SPMT]

Whether he's 1st, 5th, or 205th, yes he's still selfish for bailing out on his team.

Bullshit. Kind of like coaches who bail on ?the team??

[SPMT]

The chances of severe injury are so minuscule loyalty to your team weighs a ton heavier. Sitting out your final game of your collegiate year unless a NY6? Naw. Hell Naw. Leach is correct. What's next; just skip the egg bowl too?

If it was your kid and you weren?t rich you?d have a different take. And 17 these coaches! They are as much of the problem as anything. If I have any SEC coach, Riley, etc calling me selfish:?.they can get 17d. Those dudes are all making generational money that most of us can never get close to, regardless of job.

The universities and coaches made this bed. Lie in it.

Mullen gets $12mill NOT to 17ing work. What risk does he, Leach, or any other coach in this league have?! None, other than pride/ego!

[somebodyshotmypaw]

I've said this before and have to say it again.

Most of us grew up fans of Miss State- going to games, listening on the radio...etc. Wearing the maroon and white with love.

Most of these players view college as a necessary stop on their way to the NFL. They feel the way about the NFL the way we do about college. Cross has achieved his goal- use his college time to get to The League. It's about getting paid- not playing in a meaningless bowl game thats for the fans and Seniors that have no chance to play again.

It?s his decision and I respect it. But I would play. You couldn?t keep me off the field.

[somebodyshotmypaw]

Mullen gets $12mill NOT to 17ing work. What risk does he, Leach, or any other coach in this league have?! None, other than pride/ego!

Imagine being so bad at your job that they pay you not to show up and work.

[Matt3467]

If it was your kid and you weren?t rich you?d have a different take. And 17 these coaches! They are as much of the problem as anything. If I have any SEC coach, Riley, etc calling me selfish:?.they can get 17d. Those dudes are all making generational money that most of us can never get close to, regardless of job.

The universities and coaches made this bed. Lie in it.

Mullen gets $12mill NOT to 17ing work. What risk does he, Leach, or any other coach in this league have?! None, other than pride/ego!

Another comparison taken out of context is this comparing what coaches are making to what college football players get. If people would actually sit down and think about it that line of thinking is full of holes. Riley, Leach, or really any coach at the college and nfl level put in years of time and money to get where they're at. Crying foul that teenagers aren't making what the coaches make is like working as a cashier at Walmart and demanding to get CEO pay. You think Leach was making life changing money at 21,22, or even 25 years old?

[OLJWales]

Another comparison taken out of context is this comparing what coaches are making to what college football players get. If people would actually sit down and think about it that line of thinking is full of holes. Riley, Leach, or really any coach at the college and nfl level put in years of time and money to get where they're at. Crying foul that teenagers aren't making what the coaches make is like working as a cashier at Walmart and demanding to get CEO pay. You think Leach was making life changing money at 21,22, or even 25 years old?

Repped

[dawggrad08]

Another comparison taken out of context is this comparing what coaches are making to what college football players get. If people would actually sit down and think about it that line of thinking is full of holes. Riley, Leach, or really any coach at the college and nfl level put in years of time and money to get where they're at. Crying foul that teenagers aren't making what the coaches make is like working as a cashier at Walmart and demanding to get CEO pay. You think Leach was making life changing money at 21,22, or even 25 years old?

You're missing the point here. Kids have an opportunity to make generational money (similar to the coaches) for which they've invested years of time and money. You think coaches are the only one's who put in 10-15 years to get here? Some of these players have been playing football since they were 8-9 years old. It's THIER risk to take or not take. And no matter how miniscule someone might say the risk is, it exists. For every kid that plays and doesn't get hurt, there are others who do. Put it like this...if someone says, "Here's a guaranteed 10M, now...you can choose to speed down the highway in your car with some friends you may or may not see again. If you have an accident (even if it's not fatal), you lose all the money. Or, you can stay put in this hotel room for 3 days...and you keep it all." Which are you choosing

Meanwhile, coaches, who also signed contracts to coach at their respective schools, are leaving faster than snow can melt in the desert. Kelly left while a CFB bowl was still possible for crying out loud. So we're allowing freedoms to coaches, yet wanting to shame the players into playing. And why are some only mad at the players declaring for the draft? Why not call out the transfers too...it's no different. At the end of the day, accept that some players involved in college football are taking their cues from the adults in treating it like a business. Because that's exactly what it is.

[OLJWales]

You're missing the point here. Kids have an opportunity to make generational money (similar to the coaches) for which they've invested years of time and money. You think coaches are the only one's who put in 10-15 years to get here? Some of these players have been playing football since they were 8-9 years old. It's THIER risk to take or not take. And no matter how miniscule someone might say the risk is, it exists. For every kid that plays and doesn't get hurt, there are others who do. Put it like this...if someone says, "Here's a guaranteed 10M, now...you can choose to speed down the highway in your car with some friends you may or may not see again. If you have an accident (even if it's not fatal), you lose all the money. Or, you can stay put in this hotel room for 3 days...and you keep it all." Which are you choosing

Meanwhile, coaches, who also signed contracts to coach at their respective schools, are leaving faster than snow can melt in the desert. Kelly left while a CFB bowl was still possible for crying out loud. So we're allowing freedoms to coaches, yet wanting to shame the players into playing. And why are some only mad at the players declaring for the draft? Why not call out the transfers too...it's no different. At the end of the day, accept that some players involved in college football are taking their cues from the adults in treating it like a business. Because that's exactly what it is.

17 this. Most coaches are old enough to be the players' DADDY. play your last game and support your team youngster.

[Tater]

There's a simple solution that would make everyone happy.

School should set up an "NIL" Insurance policy for the kid projected to go in the first round that pays out generational money in the event of an injury etc. IANAL, but Leach is, so he could be out in front of this.

Set that up and pay for it on the condition the kid plays and also emphasize that anything can happen (see: Malik Heath wreck) to mess it up off the field as well and protect against that. Several people have taking these insurance deals (Sam Bradford was the first that came to my mind.) Someone with better connections get on it before I email John directly.

[OhGee]

Anybody besides Cross sitting out?

Emerson? I haven't heard.

[yjnkdawg]

I don't like Corral , but Corral is a gamer and he wouldn't sit out any game unless an injury prevented him from doing so. Not all players look at it from that perspective.

[Extendedcab]

Based on your intellect that you've displayed with your posts, I'm cool with that

Without contracts, our society as we know it would not exist, we would be a 3rd world country like Afghanistan and other God forsaken hell holes.

You apparently do NOT know that the legal institution of contracts are based in the morality of promise, under which individuals incur obligations freely by invoking each other's trust and good faith. It is a means for two or more parties (people or institutions/companies) to impose on themselves obligations where none existed before. Obligations of the contract are the basis of a civilized society (without a civilized society, there is no sports - where is the collegiate soccer/football team in Afghanistan?). Throughout the greater part of our history, our constitutional law and politics have proceeded on these same principles. The validity of a moral, like that of a mathematical truth, does not depend on fashion or favor or today's politically shifting atmosphere.

National Letters of Intent (NLI) are a contract where the university declares that the individual will receive either full or partial money or its equivalent that pays for the cost of education. In return the individual, student athlete, promises to engage in a sports activity in return. I have seen "some" NLIs and they are written with enough holes to drive a MAC truck through. I agree they suck as a legal agreement, but regardless, the intent is still there. The university provides a service (education - something of value) to the individual in return for participation is a sport (something of value in return).

For those that want to ignore the intent of the NLI and look for ways to take advantage of the poor wording for their advantage is deplorable. I guess that is the world we live in; a world where one's word is not to be trusted or relied upon. It's all about ME!

So if you think living up to your end of the agreement is lame and no one does it anymore, then go ahead and hate all you want. These people are getting a benefit at anothers expense. That is not the intent of a contract - it is equal benefits for all parties.

All I can say to the student athlete is to MAN UP - the university did, in fact they go over and above the call of duty with special facilities dedicated to them and the free tutors and other perks and considerations not related to getting an education.

Flame on -

[BrunswickDawg]

Without contracts, our society as we know it would not exist, we would be a 3rd world country like Afghanistan and other God forsaken hell holes.

You apparently do NOT know that the legal institution of contracts are based in the morality of promise, under which individuals incur obligations freely by invoking each other's trust and good faith. It is a means for two or more parties (people or institutions/companies) to impose on themselves obligations where none existed before. Obligations of the contract are the basis of a civilized society (without a civilized society, there is no sports - where is the collegiate soccer/football team in Afghanistan?). Throughout the greater part of our history, our constitutional law and politics have proceeded on these same principles. The validity of a moral, like that of a mathematical truth, does not depend on fashion or favor or today's politically shifting atmosphere.

National Letters of Intent (NLI) are a contract where the university declares that the individual will receive either full or partial money or its equivalent that pays for the cost of education. In return the individual, student athlete, promises to engage in a sports activity in return. I have seen "some" NLIs and they are written with enough holes to drive a MAC truck through. I agree they suck as a legal agreement, but regardless, the intent is still there. The university provides a service (education - something of value) to the individual in return for participation is a sport (something of value in return).

For those that want to ignore the intent of the NLI and look for ways to take advantage of the poor wording for their advantage is deplorable. I guess that is the world we live in; a world where one's word is not to be trusted or relied upon. It's all about ME!

So if you think living up to your end of the agreement is lame and no one does it anymore, then go ahead and hate all you want. These people are getting a benefit at anothers expense. That is not the intent of a contract - it is equal benefits for all parties.

All I can say to the student athlete is to MAN UP - the university did, in fact they go over and above the call of duty with special facilities dedicated to them and the free tutors and other perks and considerations not related to getting an education.

Flame on -

And yet coaches can come to a player and say "you aren't going to play. You don't fit in our plans for the future. If you want to continue to play football, we will help find you a landing spot. We hear USM is looking for XXX positions in the portal." They can do this any time, and while they can't "take" your scholarship anymore, the writing is on the wall. None of this is as cut and dry as you are trying to make it out to be. Ultimately, players want to play and the 1 free transfer rule allows that to happen. Opting out of a meaningless bowl is akin to that as well - and is part of this relationship between players and programs no longer being a one-way street.

Just look at the players we have lost - the vast majority of them have dropped to G5 or FCS. If you think those guys just left a P5 program on their own accord, I've got some beachfront property in Chunky you might be interested in.

[OLJWales]

And yet coaches can come to a player and say "you aren't going to play. You don't fit in our plans for the future. If you want to continue to play football, we will help find you a landing spot. We hear USM is looking for XXX positions in the portal." They can do this any time, and while they can't "take" your scholarship anymore, the writing is on the wall. None of this is as cut and dry as you are trying to make it out to be. Ultimately, players want to play and the 1 free transfer rule allows that to happen. Opting out of a meaningless bowl is akin to that as well - and is part of this relationship between players and programs no longer being a one-way street.

Just look at the players we have lost - the vast majority of them have dropped to G5 or FCS. If you think those guys just left a P5 program on their own accord, I've got some beachfront property in Chunky you might be interested in.

NLI gives the college the option to not renew schollies, right? Player cop-opt outs are not.

[BrunswickDawg]

NLI gives the college the option to not renew schollies, right? Player cop-opt outs are not.

So it's ok for management to do what they want, but labor "has" to because of some mythical one sided "loyalty"? That type of thinking is why the NCAA was blown up by the NIL rulings.

[OLJWales]

So it's ok for management to do what they want, but labor "has" to because of some mythical one sided "loyalty"? That type of thinking is why the NCAA was blown up by the NIL rulings.

Football schollies are life changing opportunities. "Labor" is NOT getting screwed.

[BrunswickDawg]

Football schollies are life changing opportunities. "Labor" is NOT getting screwed.

If you are performing services for compensation, you are by definition labor. Doesn't matter what service is or the compensation is.