OrediggerPoke said:
ragtimejoe1 said:
OrediggerPoke said:
But Cox left during the middle of the season rather than to simply stick it out, work hard to earn playing time and transfer at the end of the season. Plain and simple - he bailed on his teammates. Can't say I see much reason to follow him.
Honestly, I think it is better for all parties involved for him to bail as soon as his mind was made up about transferring. Coaches bail on teams all the time at the end of the season and prior to a bowl game. In this case, he knew the offense wasn't for him and he was leaving. No point in risking injury to stick it out and no point in taking reps from others who will be remaining POKES.
I wish nothing but the best for the kid and don't hold anything against him. Hope his new spot brings him a lot of success.
I see the viewpoint, but it just isn't how I was raised (when you start something and give your commitment, you finish it). The University made a commitment to the player by giving him a scholarship that included tuition and living expenses. The player did not live up to his commitment (in my opinion) by accepting those benefits and then not completing the job for which the player accepted the benefit. The team was competing for a bowl game and was relying on the availability of the player. By leaving mid-season, you create issues for your teammates by leaving the team too thin at a particular position or requiring a player that would have redshirted to forego the redshirt. It is a selfish decision in my mind.
You could definitely be right. I don't remember the roster adjustments that were made to accommodate him leaving. I guess with the way coaches can leave at the drop of the hat, I don't blame the kids for having marginal loyalty.
Really, WR in this offense is more of a blocking position. Again, I could be totally wrong, but I doubt offensive production dropped much after he left. Definitely agree that if someone had to burn a redshirt, then bad move by him. Other side of course is that he only played 3 games that year so was able to maintain that year of eligibility. Probably made the transfer easier to have 3 years of eligibility instead of 2 if he stuck it out.
I definitely get the commitment thing, but, in this case, I also understand why he'd bail. Why burn a year of eligibility in this offense as a WR?