Freshmen ineligibility

Do you think freshmen ineligibility is a good idea?

  • Yes

    Votes: 22 55.0%

  • No

    Votes: 10 25.0%

  • Not sure

    Votes: 8 20.0%
  • Total voters
    40
GSG

GSG

Assistant Coach
Bo mentioned in some interviews yesterday that he would like to see a freshmen ineligiblity rule. He believes it would help with the on-field product as well as help they kids get acclimated to balancing college classes, athletics, and college life.

I'm kind of on the fence about this. I can definitely see the benefits, but there are some of these kids that blow up their freshmen year. Do you want to take that away from them?

What do you think?

 
Here's the quote from Pelini:

>>> Pelini doesn’t often provide a definitive opinion on various national debates, but he did decide to share one of his reform ideas Thursday. Pelini would like to see a rule enacted that eliminates freshman eligibility. He thinks it would benefit the on-field product, the players’ academic goals and the recruiting process if freshmen weren’t allowed to play for one year. “Let’s slow this thing down a little bit,” Pelini said. “I think there’s pretty big division on how people feel about that subject. But I like that idea.”
Click to expand...
http://sports.omaha.com/2011/07/28/pelini-addresses-eligibility-questions-bubbas-decision/

 
I'm on the fence about this. Burkhead came in as a true freshman and started as one and had no problem at all. Though he might be in a minority when it comes to Bo's idea. But i feel if you have the depth, freshman should sit out for a year, if you don't, you don't want this rule coming and biting you back in the butt, Bo.

 
Right now we put the best players on the field. Whether the guy is a true freshman or a 5th year senior. Freshman ineligibility does not seem consistent with this.

 
This kind of suprises me considering how frequently Bo redshirts freshman. If they were already ineligible, no one would redshirt their freshman year. That means we'd have a ton of guys playing 3 years instead of 4...because those that get time as redshirt freshman (martinez) would end up playing as sophomores and never use the redshirt. We might have 3 more years of Martinez as is currently. Had he been ineligible as a freshman, he would have been playing as a sophomore last year and we'd only have 2 left. It would reduce the number or redshirt players considerably and help w/ the scholarship numbers that's for sure.

You also might see more kids graduating...instead of playing 3 years and heading to the NFL. To get 3 years in, you'd have to be playing as a senior which means you're more likely to have that degree. Some would leave after 2, but most need those 3 years to have enough NFL stock to leave. This would boost the average age of the starting squad some, and maybe the quality of football on the field. Especially on teams like Alabama/Florida/USC/Texas where they recruit a lot of top end talent...then see them leave after 3. Now all that tallent we are happy to see go, would be around for another year. Alabama w/ Ingram another year, or Oklahoma w/ Bradford another year. Not exactly teams we'd have enjoyed facing. Since Nebraska, historically, doesn't have a lot of players leave early anyway...we'd probably be at a disadvantage from this perspective.

On the other side of that, it might level the recruiting field some...as the "play right away" argument would be gone. Teams like Texas that historically play a bunch of freshman would be at a disadvantage early on.

It would certainly change a lot.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am going out on a limb here and saying that by the time this season is over nobody is going to want to automatically redshirt every Freshman after watching what Jamal Turner does.

 
kchusker_chris said:
This kind of suprises me considering how frequently Bo redshirts freshman. If they were already ineligible, no one would redshirt their freshman year. That means we'd have a ton of guys playing 3 years instead of 4...because those that get time as redshirt freshman (martinez) would end up playing as sophomores and never use the redshirt. We might have 3 more years of Martinez as is currently. Had he been ineligible as a freshman, he would have been playing as a sophomore last year and we'd only have 2 left. It would reduce the number or redshirt players considerably and help w/ the scholarship numbers that's for sure.

You also might see more kids graduating...instead of playing 3 years and heading to the NFL. To get 3 years in, you'd have to be playing as a senior which means you're more likely to have that degree. Some would leave after 2, but most need those 3 years to have enough NFL stock to leave. This would boost the average age of the starting squad some, and maybe the quality of football on the field. Especially on teams like Alabama/Florida/USC/Texas where they recruit a lot of top end talent...then see them leave after 3. Now all that tallent we are happy to see go, would be around for another year. Alabama w/ Ingram another year, or Oklahoma w/ Bradford another year. Not exactly teams we'd have enjoyed facing. Since Nebraska, historically, doesn't have a lot of players leave early anyway...we'd probably be at a disadvantage from this perspective.

On the other side of that, it might level the recruiting field some...as the "play right away" argument would be gone. Teams like Texas that historically play a bunch of freshman would be at a disadvantage early on.

It would certainly change a lot.
Click to expand...
I think you are mistaken as to what Bo means, he is implying an "automatic" redshirt to each player. Players still get 5 years in the program, they just have to redshirt their first year. It would also cut down on upperclassmen transfers.

However, I am also on the fence.

 
This isn't really a new idea. I don't know when it changed, but I know that guys like Turner Gill had to play on the freshman team before moving up to varsity their sophomore year.

This debate isn't about what's best for the depth on the team or what is going to help you win games. It's about what is best for the student-athlete. If every team had to redshirt all of their freshmen, then it'd be an even playing field just like it is now.

 
I can't seem to find it, but I know for a fact Bo said in a press conference last year: "I never recruit anybody with the intention of redshirting them."

 
I like the idea of redshirting all freshmen, but it's tough to do in this day and age because of the scholarship limits and to a lesser degree the potential for losing players to the NFL draft. So I think from a idealistic frame of mind Pelini can support this issue, but from a practical standpoint he must recruit the best players that he can and play them as needed. I think what he was trying to convey was that he keeps an open mind on whether the player will redshirt or not as they won't know how the player stacks up until they get to campus. Then at that point they can make a recommendation to the player based on how they do and what the team needs. The player ultimately makes the decision with input from the coaches. I do think that they sign players that they expect will end up redshirting. It's splitting hairs somewhat. Bo's not the best word-smith.

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