Does Winning a Superbowl Ring Matter...

Enhance

Enhance

Administrator
Staff member
I got this topic from our overly-intelligent..

*HACK*

Sorry, threw up in my mouth a little bit..

Anyways, I got this from our good buddies over at Tigerboard. There was a discussion going about Chase Daniel getting a Superbowl ring because he is on the Saints roster and team. Naturally, the Missouri posters were pretty jacked up and excited for him, but then an NU poster pointed out it's rather irrelevant considering Chase will not directly effect the outcome of the game on the field. He is, for a lack of a better term, a bench warmer.

Now in my eyes, I think any player that didn't directly contribute to a Superbowl championship on the field may as well just put a big giant asterisk emblem next to the Superbowl ring in their trophy case. Sure, benchwarmers can provide a certain level of help on the sidelines, but I'm a firm believer that everything happens on the field. Regardless of what is said on the sidelines, you have to perform out on the field. So, naturally, I believe that Chase's Superbowl ring will be irrelevant (if he wins it) and something that he can be proud the "team" accomplished. However, it cannot be something he should feel he earned.

Your thoughts?

 
so should all the great husker walk-ons that never made it off the scout teams or got a couple scrub minute plays throughout the year turn in their national championship rings and not be proud?

or what about the GM or player personnel directors? they collected the players on the field that are winning the rings...do they have to put an asterisk next to theirs? do theirs mean less?

personally, I dont think so. Its a team. I hate Booger as much as the next guy, but he's been there with the team and contributing in ways we'll probably never even know. The players on the field get their glory and have bigger braggin rights I guess, but a ring is a ring to me.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Enhance89 said:
I got this topic from our overly-intelligent..

*HACK*

Sorry, threw up in my mouth a little bit..

Anyways, I got this from our good buddies over at Tigerboard. There was a discussion going about Chase Daniel getting a Superbowl ring because he is on the Saints roster and team. Naturally, the Missouri posters were pretty jacked up and excited for him, but then an NU poster pointed out it's rather irrelevant considering Chase will not directly effect the outcome of the game on the field. He is, for a lack of a better term, a bench warmer.

Now in my eyes, I think any player that didn't directly contribute to a Superbowl championship on the field may as well just put a big giant asterisk emblem next to the Superbowl ring in their trophy case. Sure, benchwarmers can provide a certain level of help on the sidelines, but I'm a firm believer that everything happens on the field. Regardless of what is said on the sidelines, you have to perform out on the field. So, naturally, I believe that Chase's Superbowl ring will be irrelevant (if he wins it) and something that he can be proud the "team" accomplished. However, it cannot be something he should feel he earned.

Your thoughts?
Click to expand...
Chase has actually impressed most of the coaching staff with his play on the scout team, his general smarts and decision making, and the ability in practice to stand in the pocket and deliver. The coaches have mentioned that the Saints offense is built around a shorter QB, so don't be surprised is he makes an impact next season. It's a long shot, but you never know.

As for the ring - Starters get really big ones with 2 diamonds, 2nd stringers get littler ones with 1 diamond, special teams get little ones with cubic zirconium and practice squad players get cigar bands.

 
Chase Daniel would absolutely deserve one hes part of the team...

However the thing I have a issue is the Saints signing a guy like Duece McAllister and he will get a ring if they win, but he doesn't even suit up.

 
mmmtodd said:
so should all the great husker walk-ons that never made it off the scout teams or got a couple scrub minute plays throughout the year turn in their national championship rings and not be proud?

or what about the GM or player personnel directors? they collected the players on the field that are winning the rings...do they have to put an asterisk next to theirs? do theirs mean less?

personally, I dont think so. Its a team. I hate Booger as much as the next guy, but he's been there with the team and contributing in ways we'll probably never even know. The players on the field get their glory and have bigger braggin rights I guess, but a ring is a ring to me.
Click to expand...
I was thinking the same exact thing. Regardless to my disdain for him he obviously had the skills necessary to make it to the next level. He made through training camp and obviously impressed them enough for them to pass on Joey Harrington for him.
I think using the he didn't play thing is the wrong way to approach this. (especially the way we value the 1/11 team tradition) The better approach would be we have more former players in this game compared to their one. Cody Glenn for the Colts and Carl Nicks and Scott Shanle from the Saints.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
mmmtodd said:
so should all the great husker walk-ons that never made it off the scout teams or got a couple scrub minute plays throughout the year turn in their national championship rings and not be proud?

or what about the GM or player personnel directors? they collected the players on the field that are winning the rings...do they have to put an asterisk next to theirs? do theirs mean less?

personally, I dont think so. Its a team. I hate Booger as much as the next guy, but he's been there with the team and contributing in ways we'll probably never even know. The players on the field get their glory and have bigger braggin rights I guess, but a ring is a ring to me.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with your last statement at all.

In fact, I'm not even saying they don't deserve to get a ring or anything like that.

My question is more or less do you think players care about whatever they get if they don't contribute on the playing field as much as they would if they got one being a starter? I would personally love a ring if I was a second teamer and didn't see a lick of playing time during the game, but I would still want to actually play and win one personally. It would mean more to me.

 
Well of course they would have rather played. That's like astronauts. There are a thousands of them, got the patch and everything, all trained up and no ship to catch. Less than 500 total from 39 countries have actually been into space.

On a personal level, my uncle has a ring from the 85 Bears. He was on IR, and has said of course he would have liked to actually played, but overall it means the world to him regardless, that it was such a rare chance and honor to be a part of it in any form. And the way he shows it off sometimes you would think he was Sweetness himself. ;)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
huskerguy said:
However the thing I have a issue is the Saints signing a guy like Duece McAllister and he will get a ring if they win, but he doesn't even suit up.
Click to expand...
Exactly...did he even practice one time all year??

 
Last edited by a moderator:
killer cacti said:
WVhuskerXX said:
huskerguy said:
However the thing I have a issue is the Saints signing a guy like Duece McAllister and he will get a ring if they win, but he doesn't even suit up.
Click to expand...
Exactly...did he even practice one time all year??
Click to expand...
Kinda off subject, but I have bowl rings from Clemson as a trainer, and I still treasure them.
Click to expand...
Pictures??? I would love to own a Husker ring from one of our bowl games or championship seasons. Can't afford the darn things though............

 
BIGREDIOWAN said:
killer cacti said:
WVhuskerXX said:
huskerguy said:
However the thing I have a issue is the Saints signing a guy like Duece McAllister and he will get a ring if they win, but he doesn't even suit up.
Click to expand...
Exactly...did he even practice one time all year??
Click to expand...
Kinda off subject, but I have bowl rings from Clemson as a trainer, and I still treasure them.
Click to expand...
Pictures??? I would love to own a Husker ring from one of our bowl games or championship seasons. Can't afford the darn things though............
Click to expand...
I'll see if I can find a pic of them somewhere on the internet, otherwise I'll get a pic of them tonight.

 
BRI, here's some I found on the internet...

It's a terrible pic, but here's the one from the peach bowl in 2004 against Tennessee.

And the one from 2005 against Colorado.

Then, here's the Clemson class ring. I wear mine most days...

I very rarely wear the bowl rings, unless it is a big occasion.

 
A friend of mine was a Walk On that redshirted during the 1997 season and he got a National Championship ring. I’ll ask him when I see him if that ring means that much to him since he never saw the field.

FWIW: His 1999 Big 12 Championship ring is nicer then his 1997 National Championship one.

 
It's really just up to each individual player to decide what value they will place on the ring/championship. Obviously a bench-warmer isn't going to feel 1/10th as good about the title as a starter, but that doesn't mean they won't derive some value from it. Maybe they feel they helped out the team some small amount by their effort in practice, or just generally adding to team unity in some way off the field. Plus I'm sure they think the ring is cool, even if they don't feel like they did much to earn it.

But I highly doubt the Saints will win, which means the discussion should be about Cody Glenn, not Chase Daniel (although Cody does see the field a few plays a game).

http://tweetphoto.com/9540949

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top