Redshirting vs not redshirting

[RealTucoSalamanca]

Chunky R yes (same class as elder Farniok and Wilson), the other 2 will be RS Jrs.

Correct, My bad. My argument with him is that he appears to want to redshirt up front and then try and get rid of the non-contributors on the back end. Which is something Nebraska has not shown the tendency to do. We typically don't let those guys go until their eligibility is up. Where if you don't redshirt, you just let them go after 4 years.

 

[Bigredhunter]

I posted this in another thread, but after reading this thread, it appears that this is a better place for my thoughts.....

Here is my opinion. I hope by the time that Lynn, Banks and Anderson are in their 3rd year, that there are 3 guys younger than them that come in and beat them out. Then we can have 3 "old" dudes that are good enough to be backups and not just starting because they are RS Jr or RS Sr's.

I have written my opinion on RS many times. My best explanation was as a member of another site and I can't seem to locate how I wrote it. But it goes something like this.

Numbers are the key. You have to figure out a way to cycle out enough non contributing players in 4 years or less so that you can continue to recruit 25 players every year. If you redshirt every freshman, you will never get to that point. You will only be able recruit 18-21 players per year. So what happens is that you find yourself sitting with noncontributing players on your roster, with nothing but the hope that they will be productive as RS Jrs and RS Srs. My opinion is that is a silly way to manage a roster.

To me I would only redshirt walkons, and guys I took a flyer on.

My theory is this:

if a guy is a high 4 star or 5 star player, I am not redshirting because if he is as good as advertised, he won't be here all 5 years. If he is not as good as advertised, I want him to just use his 4 years and be gone so another scholarship opens up in 4 years rather than 5.

If a player is a mid- high 3 star to 4 star, I am not redshirting because, IF I do my job as a recruiter, I replace that same level player with at least that same level player every year. Also, if I do my job as a developmental coach, I can get the next player to be as good as the one before him.

If a guy is unranked to a mid 3 star, I would probably redshirt because I saw an undeveloped talent that I am not giving a scholarship to or a player that I can develop enough to provide depth when they are Jrs and Srs. But, again, if I am doing my job as a recruiter, the number of scholarships should be low.

Each year there are, on average, 40-44 players that see any significant playing time. Turning the roster over and doing my best to replace the departing player with a better player is my job as a coach.

If I am able to recruit 25 per year, I get 100 guys per 4 year cycle, If I redshirt a majority of every class, I only get to 68-80 over the same period, depending on attrition. The more players you can sign, the better chance you have of finding more difference makers.

Good discussion

In theory it would be great if high 4 star recruits were ready to shine from day 1 and didn't require development. Unfortunately that usually is not the case. Even players going to the NFL typically have a redshirt season. We can't just over recruit year after year hoping to get lucky. Development matters!!

This is a list of every OLineman drafted this past year. There were 34 men drafted of which 21 had a redshirt season.

2019 draft
First Round
#1. Jonah Williams, Bama, Jr
#2. Chris Lindstrom, Boston College, Jr
#3. Andre Dillard, Wazzu, Redshirt Senior
#4. Tytus Howard, Alabama St, Redshirt Senior
#5. Kaleb McGary, Washington, Redshirt Senior

Second Round
#6. Jawaan Taylor, Florida, Jr
#7. Greg Little, Ole Miss, Jr
#8. Cody Ford, Oklahoma, Redshirt Junior
#9. Dalton Risnor, Kansas St, Redshirt Senior
#10. Elgton Jenkins, Miss St, Redshirt Senior
#11. Erik McCoy, Texas A&M, Redshirt Junior
#12. Max Scharping, Northern Illinois, Redshirt Senior

Third Round
#13. Michael Deiter, Wisconsin, Redshirt Senior
#14. Nate Davis, Charlotte, Redshirt Senior
#15. Connor McGovern, Penn St, Jr
#17. Bobby Evans, Oklahoma, Redshirt Junior
#18. Yodny Cajuste, West Virginia, Redshirt Senior

Fourth Round
#19. Dru Samia, Oklahoma, Senior
#20. Hjalte Froholdt, Arkansas, Senior
#21. Ben Powers, Oklahoma, Senior
#22. Phil Haynes, Wake Forest, Redshirt Senior
#23. Wes Martin, Indiania, Redshirt Senior

Fifth Round
#24. Ross Pierschbacher, Alabama, Redshirt Senior
#25. David Edward's, Wisconsin, Redshirt Junior

Sixth Round
#26. Justin Skule, Vanderbilt, Senior
#27. Olisaemeka Udoh, Elon, Redshirt Senior
#28. Isaiah Prince, Ohio St, Senior
#29. Dennis Daley, South Carolina, Senior

Seventh Round
#30. Nick Allegretti, Illinois, Redshirt Senior
#31. Derwin Gray, Maryland, Redshirt Senior
#32. Jackson Barton, Utah, Redshirt Senior
#33. Javon Patterson, Ole Miss, Senior
#34. Joshua Mills, Morgan St, Senior

 

[RealTucoSalamanca]

In theory it would be great if high 4 star recruits were ready to shine from day 1 and didn't require development. Unfortunately that usually is not the case. Even players going to the NFL typically have a redshirt season. We can't just over recruit year after year hoping to get lucky. Development matters!!

This is a list of every OLineman drafted this past year. There were 34 men drafted of which 21 had a redshirt season.

2019 draft
First Round
#1. Jonah Williams, Bama, Jr
#2. Chris Lindstrom, Boston College, Jr
#3. Andre Dillard, Wazzu, Redshirt Senior
#4. Tytus Howard, Alabama St, Redshirt Senior
#5. Kaleb McGary, Washington, Redshirt Senior

Second Round
#6. Jawaan Taylor, Florida, Jr
#7. Greg Little, Ole Miss, Jr
#8. Cody Ford, Oklahoma, Redshirt Junior
#9. Dalton Risnor, Kansas St, Redshirt Senior
#10. Elgton Jenkins, Miss St, Redshirt Senior
#11. Erik McCoy, Texas A&M, Redshirt Junior
#12. Max Scharping, Northern Illinois, Redshirt Senior

Third Round
#13. Michael Deiter, Wisconsin, Redshirt Senior
#14. Nate Davis, Charlotte, Redshirt Senior
#15. Connor McGovern, Penn St, Jr
#17. Bobby Evans, Oklahoma, Redshirt Junior
#18. Yodny Cajuste, West Virginia, Redshirt Senior

Fourth Round
#19. Dru Samia, Oklahoma, Senior
#20. Hjalte Froholdt, Arkansas, Senior
#21. Ben Powers, Oklahoma, Senior
#22. Phil Haynes, Wake Forest, Redshirt Senior
#23. Wes Martin, Indiania, Redshirt Senior

Fifth Round
#24. Ross Pierschbacher, Alabama, Redshirt Senior
#25. David Edward's, Wisconsin, Redshirt Junior

Sixth Round
#26. Justin Skule, Vanderbilt, Senior
#27. Olisaemeka Udoh, Elon, Redshirt Senior
#28. Isaiah Prince, Ohio St, Senior
#29. Dennis Daley, South Carolina, Senior

Seventh Round
#30. Nick Allegretti, Illinois, Redshirt Senior
#31. Derwin Gray, Maryland, Redshirt Senior
#32. Jackson Barton, Utah, Redshirt Senior
#33. Javon Patterson, Ole Miss, Senior
#34. Joshua Mills, Morgan St, Senior

I don't care about NFL draft picks. I care about Nebraska winning football games. That is it. Nothing more nothing less.

Less than 1% of college football players are drafted to the NFL. So the fact that 21 of 34 offensive linemen were redshirts means **** to me.

 

[Bigredhunter]

I don't care about NFL draft picks. I care about Nebraska winning football games. That is it. Nothing more nothing less.

Less than 1% of college football players are drafted to the NFL. So the fact that 21 of 34 offensive linemen were redshirts means **** to me.

He is the poster child for my theory. Why do you spend a redshirt on him? If he was a stud then he wouldn't be here for a 5th year, if he is a bust, then why do you want him to be here for a 5th year.

You don't have to care about the NFL. You stated if Raridon was a stud he wouldn't be here for a 5th year. The stats prove otherwise!

Of course I completely agree with you regarding the potential of a bust holding a scholarship for a full 5 years. You have to excel at something or you'll be mediocre. We either commit to long term development or you recruit top classes every year. Right now option 1 seems to make the most sense.

 

[RealTucoSalamanca]

You don't have to care about the NFL. You stated if Raridon was a stud he wouldn't be here for a 5th year. The stats prove otherwise!

Of course I completely agree with you regarding the potential of a bust holding a scholarship for a full 5 years. You have to excel at something or you'll be mediocre. We either commit to long term development or you recruit top classes every year. Right now option 1 seems to make the most sense.

There were plenty of RS Juniors and juniors on your list of drafted players. Even without being drafted, you are not taking into account players who leave early to enter the draft that aren't drafted.

You seem to believe that there is either A or B. Development is always part of the equation, even long term development, but you don't have to provide a redshirt year to have long term development. You need to develop players so that you have someone to replace the players that leave. There is nothing, other than the Osborne Doctrine that says that that needs to include a 5th year of eligibility.

 

[John_J_Rambo]

play your best players, regardless of year.

redshirt kids who need it, who are hurt or who are mandated by the ncaa due to transfer.

this isn't rocket science, folks.

 

[Bigredhunter]

There were plenty of RS Juniors and juniors on your list of drafted players. Even without being drafted, you are not taking into account players who leave early to enter the draft that aren't drafted.

You seem to believe that there is either A or B. Development is always part of the equation, even long term development, but you don't have to provide a redshirt year to have long term development. You need to develop players so that you have someone to replace the players that leave. There is nothing, other than the Osborne Doctrine that says that that needs to include a 5th year of eligibility.

There were not plenty of Juniors and Redshirt Juniors listed. There were 9 total Junior Offensive Linemen drafted. The odds of a Junior getting drafted are so slim it shouldn't factor in our redshirt decisions at all.

Of course development should take place regardless of a redshirt year however a True Freshman sacrifices what could have been a year or year and a half developing in a college program. Why would we want players on the field straight out of high school if they can get at least one year in our program before they make their Freshman debut?

 

[oldjar07]

Then you can keep your Raridon's and Pernell Jefferson's for 5 years instead of 4. I'll rotate guys out as often as possible.

I don't expect to see Pernell Jefferson back next year. As for Raridon, I think he can provide good depth for another year. Heck maybe if he gets his chance, he will actually do a better job than people are expecting. Not his fault he had one of the worst position coaches I've ever seen, and the guy who replaced him might not be any better. Neither coach liked to play any backups either so it's pretty easy to check out mentally if you know you're never going to play.

 

[RealTucoSalamanca]

There were not plenty of Juniors and Redshirt Juniors listed. There were 9 total Junior Offensive Linemen drafted. The odds of a Junior getting drafted are so slim it shouldn't factor in our redshirt decisions at all.

Of course development should take place regardless of a redshirt year however a True Freshman sacrifices what could have been a year or year and a half developing in a college program. Why would we want players on the field straight out of high school if they can get at least one year in our program before they make their Freshman debut?

9 of 34. That is 1 of every 4. 25%, the majority of those juniors were in the first 4 rounds. stop while you are ahead.

 

[Bigredhunter]

9 of 34. That is 1 of every 4. 25%, the majority of those juniors were in the first 4 rounds. stop while you are ahead.

No man. That's just 25% of draftees. You also have to consider how rare or is to get drafted at all.

Being drafted as a Junior is so rare it's not even worth considering unless you are a 5 star talent.

 

[oldjar07]

Increasingly leaning in this direction. If a freshman is good enough to be on the depth chart, they should be informed that a RS is not a lock. Did Frost really need to play Cam Taylor last year? If there was a year that was a write off, it was last year. No, the kid was ready, he was needed and he played. And in general, and especially with skill talent, you don’t know if/when the season ending injury will hit. Coaches could work to save a red shirt for a kid who could play only to see them get injured the next year with no red shirt available. So play them when they are ready, or when they are needed in a next man up situation.

No year should be a write off. Every year you should try to get as many wins as possible. However I doubt that burning a bunch of redshirts on guys who've hardly played this year is going to help us win any more games.

 

[TheBeav815]

9 of 34. That is 1 of every 4. 25%, the majority of those juniors were in the first 4 rounds. stop while you are ahead.

Come on man, we can't be the same people who want to throw idiots out windows for not understanding that star ratings represent a percentage of likelihood of a positive outcome and then and act like 26% on something flips a formula on its head.

 

[RealTucoSalamanca]

Come on man, we can't be the same people who want to throw idiots out windows for not understanding that star ratings represent a percentage of likelihood of a positive outcome and then and act like 26% on something flips a formula on its head.

Not at all. I just simply dont believe that a year of being a practice player is the reason why guys are drafted. 1 of 4 OL drafted only played 3 years of college football, then a year of being a practice player wasn't the difference.

 

[oldjar07]

Don’t know the exact specs on conference rules re scholarships, but pretty sure a kid who is within team rules has the scholarship for 5 or until they graduate.
Scholly freshman kids who look like busts up front should not have RS offers. Pretty strong hint to move on.

You think some of these kids are going to every practice or meeting on time? From what I've heard of Bradley and Jefferson's practice habits, it wouldn't be that hard to imagine these kids are breaking some kind of team rule. As for Raridon I'd keep him just because we need all the help we can get on the OL.

 

[oldjar07]

Correct, My bad. My argument with him is that he appears to want to redshirt up front and then try and get rid of the non-contributors on the back end. Which is something Nebraska has not shown the tendency to do. We typically don't let those guys go until their eligibility is up. Where if you don't redshirt, you just let them go after 4 years.

Frost has shown he's not afraid to get rid of non-contributors. Have you paid attention to how much attrition there has been in the spring? I don't think it will be any different this year.

 

[TheBeav815]

FWIW I saw in an LJS article today that Rahmir said he wants to redshirt.

I think more players feel that way than gets talked about where if they're barely going to be involved in 5-6 games or their year one could be playing a lot in all 12+ games they want to spend their 4 years actually being in the game doing something.

 

[oldjar07]

There were plenty of RS Juniors and juniors on your list of drafted players. Even without being drafted, you are not taking into account players who leave early to enter the draft that aren't drafted.

You seem to believe that there is either A or B. Development is always part of the equation, even long term development, but you don't have to provide a redshirt year to have long term development. You need to develop players so that you have someone to replace the players that leave. There is nothing, other than the Osborne Doctrine that says that that needs to include a 5th year of eligibility.

Why the hell wouldn't you follow the Osborne doctrine? Maybe I'm misremembering but the guy seemed to have a lot of success here at Nebraska, did he not?

 

[Bigredhunter]

Not at all. I just simply dont believe that a year of being a practice player is the reason why guys are drafted. 1 of 4 OL drafted only played 3 years of college football, then a year of being a practice player wasn't the difference.

125 x 5 = 625
There are 129 D1 teams. Each has 5 starting OLinemen. That gives you 645 starting D1 linemen. There are another 625 startering OLinemen in FCS. There are another 845 starting OLinemen in D2. That doesn't count any other division.

There are over 1000 OLinemen eligible for the draft each year but only 34 total were drafted in 2019. Only 9 of the 1000 plus were Juniors. The odds of a Junior going pro are so slim it shouldn't be considered in a redshirt decision.

This isn't about getting drafted, it's about maximizing potential and letting our coaches build champions. We want Linemen progressing in our strength and conditioning program over time. We want them getting a feel for our culture and what's expected of them. Also a 17 or 18 yr old Freshmen shouldn't have peaked athletically or something has gone wrong.

 

[jeans15]

FWIW I saw in an LJS article today that Rahmir said he wants to redshirt.

I think more players feel that way than gets talked about where if they're barely going to be involved in 5-6 games or their year one could be playing a lot in all 12+ games they want to spend their 4 years actually being in the game doing something.

That's because they are not playing him.

Dont waste my redshirt year now.

 

[NikkiSixx_rivals269993]

I've seen people on the various message boards having dumb back and forth discussions about whether players should be redshirting or not. It's simply mindblowing how some people don't understand why the majority of incoming college football players at the P5 level redshirt.

1: Most young men coming to college are NOT ready physically or mentally for the college game. It's not the fault of high school coaches or parents. It's a massive jump from high school to P5 level of football. They need to adjust to the speed of the college game, the complexities of playbooks, technique always needs developing, and most need to either shed fat and put on muscle weight, some need to get stronger, and some need to add good weight so they don't get killed out there. Even Wandale being here for spring ball wasn't ready to see the field game 1 this year and his short game is arguably one of the best, if not the best among all true freshman skill players in the country.

2: Academics. There is always an adjustment period.

3: Long-term value over short-term satisfaction

When you don't redshirt a player, you are robbing them of a full year of development. Unless a player is elite coming out of high school, they need to redshirt.

Notable Redshirts
Andrew Luck
Michael Vick
Marcus Mariota
Jameis Winston
Michael Crabtree
Clay Matthews
Dwyane Wade
Emmanuel Sanders
Brett Hundley
Larry Bird
JJ Watt
I could easily list hundreds and hundreds of other names too.

People just need to chill and let the coaches develop the roster the right way. Quick fixes are not going to make any difference in getting us to 6 or 7 wins this season.

Dang.. pulling out the Larry Bird card to justify redshirting.. Now I've seen everything..

 

[inWV]

I don't care about NFL draft picks. I care about Nebraska winning football games. That is it. Nothing more nothing less.

Less than 1% of college football players are drafted to the NFL. So the fact that 21 of 34 offensive linemen were redshirts means **** to me.

I’m actually a little surprised that the number of RS wasn’t higher for the Olinemen.

 

[dand84]

I posted this in another thread, but after reading this thread, it appears that this is a better place for my thoughts.....

Great write up and thoughtful. It follows a strategy geared around getting the best players on the field as soon as possible and maximizes the recruiting cycle. I think there can be some challenges to that approach or differences in philosophy that cause coaches to not follow it fully.

First, and not specifically targeted at you, but in reference to all the "follow T.O." responses: When T.O. coached, he had 105 man roster then a 95-man roster from '78-'92. It was only in the 90s that he had to deal with 85-man rosters. Second, he didn't have a 25-man limit for Freshman. I'm not sure how much that impacted his classes and I don't have the energy to go research it. Third, I believe scholarships were year-to-year and not subject to the current P5 rules that make you award them for 4-years and can't be removed for football-related reasons. So the rules are vastly different than in his day. P.S. You also have the transfer portal now. So maybe you need to play them earlier.

So back to Tuco's strategy, why wouldn't every coach pursue this kind of strategy? These are my thoughts about why teams might not fully pursue.

• Requires more effort recruiting (finding and recruiting 25 players definitely better than my current roster versus 17 players for 5 years).
• Student-athlete philosophy. i.e., what in our cynical society we discount as disingenuous: a school wants to develop young men and understands that not everyone develops physically and emotionally at the same speed. That extra year of maturity translates to better performance on the field.
• We don't throw kids away. To maintain a 25-man recruiting class with no red-shirting, teams must cut loose 15 kids per year. That doesn't jibe with my philosophy of making sure every kid graduates under my guidance.
• S&C/Playbook/Skills - "Raw talent" might need an extra year to be able to play in a complex offense or defense. Body types might need an extra year of S&C. Position switches or ATH types might need a year to develop skills, like snapping a football.

 

[Anon1725817592]

Why the hell wouldn't you follow the Osborne doctrine? Maybe I'm misremembering but the guy seemed to have a lot of success here at Nebraska, did he not?

TO also had 10 more schollies to give out until 1992 (before it was cut down to 85), which makes it easier to RS more guys.

Also all the teams we play today have 85 scholarship players, this was NOT the case for most of TO's career. This was not always the case for our opponents during TOs day.
NU was one of the few programs that could "afford" to fill up 85-95 schollies.

U can look at our past B8 or even b12 opponents and routinely see kstate, colorado etc rosters w only 55 to 65 players on them compared to our 85 schollies and probably another 40 walkons or so.

TO had a HUGE advantage over what our coaches have today.

So it is really kind of an apples to oranges comparison between eras.

 

[uberism1111]

Ty redshirtred this year and focused on technique. Now he competes with the 1s in practice.

 

[uberism1111]

Rogers redshirted last year and now gets reps with the 1s. Why? He spent the redshirt year getting stronger, reshaping his body, and worked in technique.

BTW, Ty is now over 300 pounds. Will be a beast in the DL next year.

 

[inWV]

Rogers redshirted last year and now gets reps with the 1s. Why? He spent the redshirt year getting stronger, reshaping his body, and worked in technique.

BTW, Ty is now over 300 pounds. Will be a beast in the DL next year.

Early evals of these two pegged them as likely future contributors. What would you do with a freshman scholarship lineman who is being outperformed by walkons and is pegged as likely to never crack the depth chart?

 

[RealTucoSalamanca]

Rogers redshirted last year and now gets reps with the 1s. Why? He spent the redshirt year getting stronger, reshaping his body, and worked in technique.

BTW, Ty is now over 300 pounds. Will be a beast in the DL next year.

great. And if they weren’t redshirted and just didnt get on the field, the same gains would have been made and they would just be sophomores instead of RS freshmen. Under my theory, you should be recruiting players in the years following that should be capable of replacing Rogers and Ty and hopefully better than Rogers and Ty. In theory those new recruits would beat them out before Rogers and Ty have used up their 4 years.

 

[Hastings4Huskers]

great. And if they weren’t redshirted and just didnt get on the field, the same gains would have been made and they would just be sophomores instead of RS freshmen. Under my theory, you should be recruiting players in the years following that should be capable of replacing Rogers and Ty and hopefully better than Rogers and Ty. In theory those new recruits would beat them out before Rogers and Ty have used up their 4 years.

Spot on. Held has mentioned he is looking at recruiting players that can come and compete and potentially take that starting spot from players he has recruited previously.

 

[oldjar07]

great. And if they weren’t redshirted and just didnt get on the field, the same gains would have been made and they would just be sophomores instead of RS freshmen. Under my theory, you should be recruiting players in the years following that should be capable of replacing Rogers and Ty and hopefully better than Rogers and Ty. In theory those new recruits would beat them out before Rogers and Ty have used up their 4 years.

Since the other thread died, I'll put this here too. This is why your theory is flawed:

3 star talent is hardly ever able to contribute their first year. If you don't redshirt them, you're limiting yourself to only 3 years where those players have the potential to be contributors. If you do redshirt them their first year, you get 4 years where that player has the potential to contribute. Another thing with 3 star talent is they generally don't become starter quality until they're upperclassmen. If you don't redshirt that player, you might only get 1 year of starter quality play out of that player. If you do redshirt, you would get 2 years of starter quality play out of that same player.

Going by the numbers having 2/5 years be starter quality is better than having 1/4 (1.25/5) years be starter quality. Now let's say there's no attrition and there's a 50% hit rate of becoming a starter. In a 5 year period, you have 100 players cycling through if you don't redshirt and 80 players cycling through if you do redshirt. According to the hit rate, in a 5 year period 50 of your players will be starter quality without redshirting and 40 players will be starter quality with redshirting. But the number of players isn't important, the number of starter quality years is what's most important. In a 5 year period, with redshirting you'll get 80 starter quality years vs 62.5 starter quality years without redshirting. I know you love seeing the numbers Tuco, so I thought I'd show how redshirting can be better from a mathematical standpoint than not redshirting. The model isn't perfect by any means, but I think it shows a semi realistic view of how redshirting can be better than not redshirting.

 

[oldjar07]

TO also had 10 more schollies to give out until 1992 (before it was cut down to 85), which makes it easier to RS more guys.

Also all the teams we play today have 85 scholarship players, this was NOT the case for most of TO's career. This was not always the case for our opponents during TOs day.
NU was one of the few programs that could "afford" to fill up 85-95 schollies.

U can look at our past B8 or even b12 opponents and routinely see kstate, colorado etc rosters w only 55 to 65 players on them compared to our 85 schollies and probably another 40 walkons or so.

TO had a HUGE advantage over what our coaches have today.

So it is really kind of an apples to oranges comparison between eras.

That really isn't a good answer. If he didn't redshirt those guys, he could have had even more guys he could cycle through. I think TO realized though that the most important thing wasn't recycling guys through, but that the players he recruited took time to develop. By the time they're 4th or 5th year players, even if they weren't the highest rated recruit coming in, TO turned a lot of those players into studs. And since he redshirted them, he got 2 or 3 great years out of them as upperclassmen instead of 1 or 2 years without redshirting.

 

[TheBeav815]

I don't understand why we're operating under the premise that you can't "process out" guys who aren't on pace to accomplish something or that dudes don't ever just leave or get kicked off teams or have career-ending injuries.

Playing a freshman who isn't an upgrade over the other dudes at his spot just to play him doesn't make any sense. That would be like putting Matt Masker in a game just because he's there.

Practically all we've talked about on here lately is how NU has lost an absurd number of scholarship players over the last 5+ years. And we're looking at being down 7-9 guys from the 2018 class at year's end, too. How are we suddenly worried about having too many?

 

[Bigredhunter]

I don't understand why we're operating under the premise that you can't "process out" guys who aren't on pace to accomplish something or that dudes don't ever just leave or get kicked off teams or have career-ending injuries.

Playing a freshman who isn't an upgrade over the other dudes at his spot just to play him doesn't make any sense. That would be like putting Matt Masker in a game just because he's there.

Practically all we've talked about on here lately is how NU has lost an absurd number of scholarship players over the last 5+ years. And we're looking at being down 7-9 guys from the 2018 class at year's end, too. How are we suddenly worried about having too many?

It's bad enough that this sport dishes out random career ending injuries like what happened to our would be starting Senior Center, Michael Decker or our potential Right Tackle, Christian Gaylord. Losing 7-9 young guys would be a nightmare!!! We can't build for the future like this and if the turnover continues, at some point it has to effect recruiting.

 

[catch54]

I've seen people on the various message boards having dumb back and forth discussions about whether players should be redshirting or not. It's simply mindblowing how some people don't understand why the majority of incoming college football players at the P5 level redshirt.

1: Most young men coming to college are NOT ready physically or mentally for the college game. It's not the fault of high school coaches or parents. It's a massive jump from high school to P5 level of football. They need to adjust to the speed of the college game, the complexities of playbooks, technique always needs developing, and most need to either shed fat and put on muscle weight, some need to get stronger, and some need to add good weight so they don't get killed out there. Even Wandale being here for spring ball wasn't ready to see the field game 1 this year and his short game is arguably one of the best, if not the best among all true freshman skill players in the country.

2: Academics. There is always an adjustment period.

3: Long-term value over short-term satisfaction

When you don't redshirt a player, you are robbing them of a full year of development. Unless a player is elite coming out of high school, they need to redshirt.

Notable Redshirts
Andrew Luck
Michael Vick
Marcus Mariota
Jameis Winston
Michael Crabtree
Clay Matthews
Dwyane Wade
Emmanuel Sanders
Brett Hundley
Larry Bird
JJ Watt
I could easily list hundreds and hundreds of other names too.

People just need to chill and let the coaches develop the roster the right way. Quick fixes are not going to make any difference in getting us to 6 or 7 wins this season.

No disrespect but most posters here do get points 1 to 3.
One of my points on this issue is recruits would see a chance to play earlier without redshirting. And they likely will see less of a logjam of players in front of them.

 

[RealTucoSalamanca]

Since the other thread died, I'll put this here too. This is why your theory is flawed:

3 star talent is hardly ever able to contribute their first year. If you don't redshirt them, you're limiting yourself to only 3 years where those players have the potential to be contributors. If you do redshirt them their first year, you get 4 years where that player has the potential to contribute. Another thing with 3 star talent is they generally don't become starter quality until they're upperclassmen. If you don't redshirt that player, you might only get 1 year of starter quality play out of that player. If you do redshirt, you would get 2 years of starter quality play out of that same player.

Going by the numbers having 2/5 years be starter quality is better than having 1/4 (1.25/5) years be starter quality. Now let's say there's no attrition and there's a 50% hit rate of becoming a starter. In a 5 year period, you have 100 players cycling through if you don't redshirt and 80 players cycling through if you do redshirt. According to the hit rate, in a 5 year period 50 of your players will be starter quality without redshirting and 40 players will be starter quality with redshirting. But the number of players isn't important, the number of starter quality years is what's most important. In a 5 year period, with redshirting you'll get 80 starter quality years vs 62.5 starter quality years without redshirting. I know you love seeing the numbers Tuco, so I thought I'd show how redshirting can be better from a mathematical standpoint than not redshirting. The model isn't perfect by any means, but I think it shows a semi realistic view of how redshirting can be better than not redshirting.

If you have 50 quality starters rather than 40 over a 5 year period that is better. You seem to want to put an extra level of quality because they have been there for another year.

I have never once said that you have to play these players as first year guys. They can sit and and develop and play after that first year.

You and others want to use the exception to the rule as a reason to keep everyone for 5 years.

 

[oldjar07]

If you have 50 quality starters rather than 40 over a 5 year period that is better. You seem to want to put an extra level of quality because they have been there for another year.

I have never once said that you have to play these players as first year guys. They can sit and and develop and play after that first year.

You and others want to use the exception to the rule as a reason to keep everyone for 5 years.

The number of starters doesn't matter as much as the number of starter quality years you get out of your players. With the assumptions I used, you'd get more total starter quality years out of your players if you redshirt your players rather than if you didn't. If those assumptions are right, the redshirted team would be better than the non redshirt team.

 

[oldjar07]

If you have 50 quality starters rather than 40 over a 5 year period that is better. You seem to want to put an extra level of quality because they have been there for another year.

I have never once said that you have to play these players as first year guys. They can sit and and develop and play after that first year.

You and others want to use the exception to the rule as a reason to keep everyone for 5 years.

Also a lot of times it takes more than 1 year of development before someone is a starter quality player. Although some players can be starter quality by their freshman year, the average is probably much closer to 3 or 4 years in even for 4 star players.

 

[RealTucoSalamanca]

The number of starters doesn't matter as much as the number of starter quality years you get out of your players. With the assumptions I used, you'd get more total starter quality years out of your players if you redshirt your players rather than if you didn't. If those assumptions are right, the redshirted team would be better than the non redshirt team.

that is a made up stat. If you always have 11 quality starters on the field for offense and 11 quality starters on the field for defense then how long they’re at the school is irrelevant. In fact for depth, I have 50 players to choose from rather than 40.

 

[oldjar07]

No disrespect but most posters here do get points 1 to 3.
One of my points on this issue is recruits would see a chance to play earlier without redshirting. And they likely will see less of a logjam of players in front of them.

That logjam of players is called depth. And even though it might not be good for that individual player, it is good for the team to have quality depth.

 

[RealTucoSalamanca]

Also a lot of times it takes more than 1 year of development before someone is a starter quality player. Although some players can be starter quality by their freshman year, the average is probably much closer to 3 or 4 years in even for 4 star players.

why do you continue to make the statement that these players won’t be ready their freshman year? I have not stated they needed to be ready their freshman year. Although some will. I have said repeatedly in this thread that the freshman year can still be used for development and adding weight. it’s just that they’re called sophomores instead of red shirt freshman in year 2. Then you get three years for that player to contribute.

 

[RealTucoSalamanca]

That logjam of players is called depth. And even though it might not be good for that individual player, it is good for the team to have quality depth.

You are making the assumption that just because a player is there and as redshirted that they automatically provide “quality” depth.