But freshman LJ couldn't contribute. The discussion is whether you play a guy who CAN contribute his freshman year or hold him for his 5th, right?
Fall camp thread
- Thread starter CryptoMiner
- Start date
But freshman LJ couldn't contribute. The discussion is whether you play a guy who CAN contribute his freshman year or hold him for his 5th, right?
Froggish
Active Member
But would Freshman LJ made us better by getting on the field? I understand but as it was pointed out, it is less likely then ever that a RS Sr chooses to play that 5th year at the same school. Still happens a lot but the trend is to loose a guy to transfer portal for that 5th year. How that trend plays out over the next few years as transfer rules become more student friendly will determine a lot about how coaches choose to use that RS
Eight
Member
lj is a great example and why if you have a kid who had to make big adjustments on the field and off.
he had to learn to practice at the level demanded of him, but he also blossomed when they moved him back out to defensive end from defensive tackle.
big ross really needed that red-shirt year as a freshman as he physically wasn't in good enough shape to contribute to the program at defensive tackle. heck, gary wanted to move him to offensive line at one point.
both of those guys were easy calls as they physically weren't capable of contributing as freshmen.
Eight
Member
disagree, ross was not physically ready to play defensive tackle his first season.
he wasn't in shape, could not got all out for three consecutive plays, and gary had to be convinced not to move him to offensive line.
Eight
Member
this is a key point and the most single frustrating thing i see at times in multiple programs..
if you are going to play a kid and burn the red-shirt then freaking play the damn kid.
how the hell tcu ended up burning a year of eligibility for stephens and hunt at receiver last year with their getting minimal game reps is stunning.
you had 4 games to put them on the field and see if they could contribute and after that they need to play or sit.
JockO de Frog
Active Member
This ^
JockO de Frog
Active Member
Oh my, I had no idea Hunt lost his redshirt. This is insane.
CountryFrog
Active Member
I know the portal gets talked about a lot but there is nothing even approaching a "trend" of losing 5th year seniors simply because they want to transfer. You certainly don't make a decision about whether or not to redshirt a player based on the thought that he could possibly be a grad transfer 4 years down the road.
Moose Stuff
Active Member
Pretend like he could have. Which one would you rather have? I’m sure you understood my point.
I still contend that if Hunt ends up being a really good receiver, there's a good chance he'll be gone after 4 years anyway. The days of a draft-eligible skill position player having a really good season and then returning to college for another year seem to be slowly disappearing.
As eight alluded to, it all depends on if the kid can contribute. If they can, I say play them. If not, then there really isn't a discussion because they are going to redshirt themselves. It's frustrating that kids like Stephens and Hunt lose a year but I do think for WRs and RBs it's different than interior lineman just because they are so much easier to replace and the positions don't take near as much development.
Eight
Member
hunt played 9 games last year and had 4 catches. no idea how many targets, but he has gained 15 lbs and is now 6'2" and a really solid 200 lbs.
he looks the part and if he wasn't ready last year then don't play him, but if he is going to play beyond game 4 last year he needed to be good enough to be involved in the game.
same with stephens who played in 8 games and had 2 catches.
Another advantage of playing right away is that it enables a "buffer" year in case of an injury. Especially with this new 4 game red shirt rule. If a player is good enough to play then get them on the field.
As an aside, Patterson mentioned that last year we "wasted" a bunch of players on the FCS game. He said this year we will utilize the 4 game rule a bit differently this year; we will probably save players for the end of the season and as depth when injuries start sneaking up.
As an aside, Patterson mentioned that last year we "wasted" a bunch of players on the FCS game. He said this year we will utilize the 4 game rule a bit differently this year; we will probably save players for the end of the season and as depth when injuries start sneaking up.
Froggish
Active Member
We aren’t talking about RS or not RS a kid who can’t contribute right away. We are talking about holding a kid back that definitively makes your team better..Why would you do that to get a 5th year
GP says some things that make no sense, and this is one of them. With the 4-game rule you don't waste kids on one game, you "waste" them by playing them on one or two downs in multiple games. Heck, in my opinion all the freshman should be playing 75% of the plays in the FCS game, they are the ones that need the live game action more than anyone.
So in order to not waste kids in the FCS game, we're going to play a bunch of 1st and 2nd teamers all game long? That makes a lot of sense.
He was talking about the players that we are still trying to preserve the redshirt for. He would rather utilize them later in the season in important games where we need depth and the players have more time in the system than in an early game that means nothing.
If this FCS gets as out of hand as it should, then I imagine we will play a lot of older players that are not going to crack the depth chart and walk ons instead of some of our freshman that are borderline redshirt vs non-redshirt players. Those are the types of players that we will probably hold back for other games instead of wasting one of their four games on an FCS school. They can get better reps in practice than they will get against Pine Bluff.
And I think this makes absolutely zero sense. If you're going to utilize a player for important games, don't worry about redshirting them. Play them because they are obviously needed.
If preserving redshirts is the goal, don't send a kid in for just a few plays in a game, period. Problem solved.
CountryFrog
Active Member
That's not at all what I was talking about in my post. I was only addressing the idea that transfers are now a trend to the point that it should factor into the decision of whether or not to redshirt a player his first year on campus.
You don't redshirt a guy just for the sole purpose of getting a fifth year, I agree. You also don't hold off on a redshirt because of a fear that someone may transfer away a few years down the road.
GP's comment was about late in the year. He needed a guy like Mathis late in the year to backfill for injuries, but he didn't have him as he played him in the FCS game.
As a freshman, there is a big difference between an 8/31 game and the last game of the season - quite a bit of transition there.
So GP better be playing all the non-redshirt, non-critical guys in the second half against APB.
Having more time in a college weight room is the biggest advantage. Especially as a QB it helps having more zip on the ball
