I think most will disagree with most of my thoughts here. That's fine. We don't all have to agree. Let me say before I get into this that I have ZERO PROBLEM with Tyler Badie not playing in this game. I've never had an issue with players sitting out non-playoff bowl games and I don't have an issue with it now.
That said, I don't understand the coaches choosing to sit Badie when he wants to play. I know Missouri will spin it as the coach has his players' best interests at heart and he's making the decision for Badie so Badie doesn't have to make it himself. But if that's true, why is he getting 41 carries against Arkansas, including 11 in the fourth quarter and Missouri's last nine offensive plays in a game that was over? The obvious answer is to set the single season rushing record. So that wasn't putting his health in jeopardy at all but playing in the Armed Forces Bowl is? Sorry, that doesn't really compute for me.
I'd also be curious when they made this call. Did they make it yesterday? If so, what changed between December 5th when Drinkwitz told us he anticipated Badie playing and December 12th when he said Akayleb Evans was the only opt out and today when he announced Badie wasn't playing? If they made it before then, why did they keep it a secret until today? It's not giving them any sort of competitive advantage because Army has another 32 hours to prep for it and really, their job got easier, not harder. Did they keep it quiet to sell more tickets? Because you're not being honest if you don't raise that possibility.
I think we can put to bed once and for all the idea that bowl games matter. The coach who has $100,000 raise and an extra year on his contract riding on this one is voluntarily sitting his best player. That pretty much crushes the idea that these games should be viewed as important.
Again, I'll conclude by saying I have absolutely no issue with Tyler Badie not playing in this game. The way it came about is very, very strange to me.
That said, I don't understand the coaches choosing to sit Badie when he wants to play. I know Missouri will spin it as the coach has his players' best interests at heart and he's making the decision for Badie so Badie doesn't have to make it himself. But if that's true, why is he getting 41 carries against Arkansas, including 11 in the fourth quarter and Missouri's last nine offensive plays in a game that was over? The obvious answer is to set the single season rushing record. So that wasn't putting his health in jeopardy at all but playing in the Armed Forces Bowl is? Sorry, that doesn't really compute for me.
I'd also be curious when they made this call. Did they make it yesterday? If so, what changed between December 5th when Drinkwitz told us he anticipated Badie playing and December 12th when he said Akayleb Evans was the only opt out and today when he announced Badie wasn't playing? If they made it before then, why did they keep it a secret until today? It's not giving them any sort of competitive advantage because Army has another 32 hours to prep for it and really, their job got easier, not harder. Did they keep it quiet to sell more tickets? Because you're not being honest if you don't raise that possibility.
I think we can put to bed once and for all the idea that bowl games matter. The coach who has $100,000 raise and an extra year on his contract riding on this one is voluntarily sitting his best player. That pretty much crushes the idea that these games should be viewed as important.
Again, I'll conclude by saying I have absolutely no issue with Tyler Badie not playing in this game. The way it came about is very, very strange to me.
