In reply to: I agree on the ring issue. posted by tdiddy07
and I doubt Swinney cares very much whether or not Bryant stayed a student at Clemson - he's punishing him for leaving the team. If players that only participate on the practice squad get a ring why shouldn't a player that actually started games (and guided Clemson to a playoff berth the year prior) get a ring?
This is a vindictive measure for a player that helped the team. It's also asking a lot to tell a player at a football-centric school to hang around and take classes after quitting the team. I imagine the social implications would be significant.
Finally, Swinney's comments about paying athletes and "entitlement" are enough for me.
some precedent for a player who quit a team mid-season and dropped out of school to receive an award postseason. Is that a thing? If a high school football player drops out of school in the middle of the season, would the coach bring him back to campus for the postseason banquet and give him a championship ring? You tell me.
You're probably right that it may not have been practical for Bryant to attend classes after quitting the team, due to his notoriety. But if a lower level player tapped out mid-season (perhaps to focus on his studies, or just couldn't handle the physical toll) but still remained a member of the student body then I would consider him to be eligible for postseason awards such as a championship ring. That's just my own opinion about where I would draw the line, I probably shouldn't have speculated about what Dabo would do in that situation.
They accepted their role to help the team win a championship. Kelly has the swag from the years he played, including a 2016 championship ring. He doesn't have the swag from the year he quit. I don't see the controversy. I certainly wouldn't expect to get a ring in those circumstances.