Coaches Asking For Redshirts to Be Able to Play in Up To Four Games

[ColoradoHusk]

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

This basically eliminates the "medical redshirt".

Not necessarily.  I would think players could still qualify for a medical redshirt after already taking a traditional redshirt, thus getting another year of eligibility.

[BigRedBuster]

I'm still not sure I like this rule change as it pertains to the game itself.  Sure, it probably is the right thing to do for the players so they don't have a wasted year for some reason like an idiotic coach that plays them for a few games then sits them.  I get that argument.

 

But, college football has always been a sport that at least tries to make the entire year mean something.  With this rule change, a team can be very very different at the beginning of the year than it is at the end of they year just simply based on what players are deemed playable by the coaching staff.  What freshmen have played their 4 games?  What players were saved to the end of the season and then all of a sudden come on the scene?

 

Does the playoff committee take into account that XYZ team lost a couple games early but now that their phenom freshman is playing, now they are a top 4 team?

 

I'm holding out judgement for a couple years to see how this rule change really changes the game.

[ScottyIce]

3 hours ago, Mavric said:

 

I don’t see a clear answer really or maybe I’m complicating it.

the rule is...

A HS kid cannot play in a bow game... right?

A freshmen can play in any 4 games including bow games... right?

[ColoradoHusk]

3 minutes ago, ScottyIce said:

I don’t see a clear answer really or maybe I’m complicating it.

the rule is...

A HS kid cannot play in a bow game... right?

A freshmen can play in any 4 games including bow games... right?

You are somewhat making things more complicated.

An incoming recruit who is enrolling mid-year can't play in a bowl game.

A true freshman can play in any 4 games, including a bowl game.

[Dagerow]

I like this rule a lot.  It’s good for the players and coach.

[ladyhawke]

I think this is a good rule change. It gives the coaches an opportunity to look at these freshman playing in an actual game without giving up a year of eligibility. 

 

[Red Five]

From 5 months ago and will be the ultimate landing spot in a few years:

 

On ‎1‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 12:26 PM, Red Five said:

Also, you are going to give them 4 1/3 years to play 5, just give everyone 5 to play 5 and do away with the redshirting designation.  That seems like the easiest solution to me.

 

 

[Mavric]

 

[GSG]

9 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

 

Love it

[cheekygeek]

I think it is worth resurrecting this thread with the comments that Barrett Ruud started out with today...
 

Earlier in this thread we weren't quite sure how this would be used at Nebraska and I'm not sure we still do, but someone in video I watched today mentioned it "will have to be managed". How Frost & Co. manage this is one of the intriguing things to watch this year.  I have the feeling that MOST of the hot shot freshman on this team might be used in just 4 games throughout the year, barring injuries to those ahead of them on the depth chart... just to maintain their 4 years of eligibility (if at all possible) and yet give them some game experience prior to the 2019 season.

I'm thinking that, if the score and game situation allows it, you give some of the (say) 3rd string Freshman game experience in your non-conference games, and save your hotshot freshman's 4 games for where you are looking to surprise people... say Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio St. and Northwestern or Michigan State. For example, 

There could also be come creative uses of this rule to "spring" a previously unseen on film freshman at somebody (like, say a Game 4 Michigan).

[Mavric]

14 minutes ago, cheekygeek said:

I'm thinking that, if the score and game situation allows it, you give some of the (say) 3rd string Freshman game experience in your non-conference games, and save your hotshot freshman's 4 games for where you are looking to surprise people... say Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio St. and Northwestern or Michigan State. For example, 

There could also be come creative uses of this rule to "spring" a previously unseen on film freshman at somebody (like, say a Game 4 Michigan).

 

It will definitely be interesting to see how it is used.  But I guess I don't think they'll really be "saving" anyone for a specific game.  Unless there are extenuating circumstances - like Miles Jones being hurt through camp so he's not really ready until part-way through the season.  If a guy is good enough to be a difference-maker, he'll be in there from the beginning.  The marginal guys are going to get worked in here and there but I doubt they'd be thrown into the fire in the Big House or Camp Randall for the first time.

 

What I'll be more interested is how they are spaced out

• Will everyone be in there Game 1 or do we get 2-3 per game throughout the season?
• Will they play all four or play in a couple games early and then save the others for later in the season in case of injuries, etc.?
• Do they "empty the tank" the last 3-4 games and get everyone in at some point (assuming they have a chance to do so)?

Will be an interesting twist.

[Moiraine]

35 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

It will definitely be interesting to see how it is used.  But I guess I don't think they'll really be "saving" anyone for a specific game.  Unless there are extenuating circumstances - like Miles Jones being hurt through camp so he's not really ready until part-way through the season.  If a guy is good enough to be a difference-maker, he'll be in there from the beginning.  The marginal guys are going to get worked in here and there but I doubt they'd be thrown into the fire in the Big House or Camp Randall for the first time.

 

What I'll be more interested is how they are spaced out

• Will everyone be in there Game 1 or do we get 2-3 per game throughout the season?
• Will they play all four or play in a couple games early and then save the others for later in the season in case of injuries, etc.?
• Do they "empty the tank" the last 3-4 games and get everyone in at some point (assuming they have a chance to do so)?

Will be an interesting twist.

 

 

 

They could even do some kind of rotation for any players that might not be good enough to be stars but are good enough to contribute. They could have player A play in games 1, 4, 7. Player B in 2, 5, 8. Player C in 3, 6, 9. Maybe it's an awful idea that would affect cohesiveness, but maybe there are some special teams where there's a group of players who are interchangeable who could get their feet wet in a real game. It could also change how they do the travel roster. Before, if you already burned a guy's redshirt then you'd know that'd be the guy you took. Now you can alternate which you take with you, and it doesn't matter which have already played (all other things equal).

Or they could play a lot of true freshman in the "easy" games that are blowouts instead of playing the 3rd string 5th year senior just to throw him a bone. I mean, it'd kind of suck for those players, but I think it's best to focus on the future.

 

I think this is a great opportunity for the coaches who are smart to gain another advantage.

[cheekygeek]

Here's the other clip from today I was thinking of, related to this subject:

 

 

[Mavric]

 

[Red Five]

I don’t see it as being a huge issue. If someone is good enough they will play. No one is going to be held back for certain games/situations imo.

 

You would need to keep tabs if there are a bunch of home blowouts when you are emptying the roster in Q4.  Road games won’t matter as much as you can only take so many players.

 

Could you imagine the blowback if NU is 3-5, then plays a freshman/men who blow up and the team wins out the last 4 games? People would be howling about how not getting these kids on the field sooner.