I stumbled upon a couple of articles about redshirting (or not redshirting) true freshmen, which, I felt like sharing given there's been a lot of discussion about playing/redshirt Lawson and Lydon.
Urban Meyer hates redshirting players, saying:
It makes for more recruiting and perhaps more growing pains, but Meyer said at his weekly press conference that he doesn't want to redshirt any freshmen, though it will happen.
"Really disappointed we didn't play them. A lot of those guys redshirted," Meyer said of the class of 2013 players. "I was very disappointed, and they weren't ready. We don't redshirt. It's not like we are going to say, 'Hey, let's save them for the '17 year and let's have a heck of a year.'
He credits Pete Carroll and the Chip Kelley's Oregon Staff for helping him develop this culture at OSU.
Charlie Strong takes it a step further, saying he'd rather play freshman than seniors:
"We told the older guys, 'If we're at the midpoint of camp and you're in a dead-heat with freshman, we're going to play the freshman.
"So you have to be head-and-shoulders above them to justify us keeping you in there along with the freshman.
Interesting view points from some innovative coaches.
Comments
I used to be all about redshirting however I like Urban's viewpoint. Why look to a couple years down the road to be great? "Hey when you guys are juniors we may have a shot at the national championship!!"
That probably helps him out in recruiting as well. "Hey if you earn the number one spot then you're playing. No matter what year you are."
I also like Strongs view on it as well because the freshman is going to be there in the upcoming years so it makes sense for him to get the most reps if the players are even.
I think we are starting to lean that way in terms of not redshirting, evidence with Lawson and the RBs last year. Even though we were forced to play them regardless, there was never any indication of redshirting Shai or Juice.
I'm definately more into the camp of if he can win the starting job now then he plays. Don't redshirt just to redshirt. If he's not good enough yet to play then he can take a redshirt.
I think there are too many variables when it comes to red shirting to just say a coach "hates it", so that means VT should not do it. When did a player get on campus, the later they did the less time they have to learn the playbook, less time to get in college football shape and conditioning. How important is getting these kids a degree, I think at VT CFB and staff think it is VERY important to have the kids earn their degree, how does Strong and Urban feel about it?
The point is, if a freshman is able to contribute to the team, you want to give him the opportunity to contribute ASAP
I'm not sure how the two equate? Are you suggesting that a player may have it together on the football field, but not the classroom?
I am 100% on board with redshirting no one.
Reasons:
- Agreement with Sir Urban: Don't 'save' anyone for next year. If they're needed or they're good enough, get them started now.
- Players can get their degrees in four years and they can fulfill their potential in college ball in four years. That's the standard career. No one can really claim they've been harmed by having a four year career.
- By time your redshirts become r-FR, you're already looking at the recruits that will replace them in a year or two. More important to keep the recruiting rolling than to 'save' a guy for later.
Exceptions:
- You're already stacked in a position and the newest guy isn't head and shoulders above the others. I think, this year, Deshawn McClease falls into this category at RB. I've heard he's good but there is a logjam in the stable.
- Guy gets injured senior year of high school and needs a year to recover.
Isn't this what redshirting does? The players get to do everything but play in the games correct? So they practice, go to team meetings, weight training, etc. Why take away a year of a player's (even NFL bound) eligibility to have them squeeze in 200 garbage time snaps? Injuries happen and having that extra year may come in handy. If the need for the players arises then you burn the redshirt and move on. If the player is not going to see significant time in the 2 deep I don't see a need to not redshirt them.
I think you're missing the point - you don't pull a redshirt for garbage time snaps; you pull a redshirt for meaningful snaps. For example, by Urban's logic, pulling Tyrod's redshirt in 2007 was the correct move. By Strong's logic, Tyrod should have been the starter in 2007.
Edit: to clarify - there is an assumption that said player can contribute in a meaningful way. You don't put them on the field just to get experience, you put them on the field because they give you a (better) chance to win. If they are unable to contribute, then, of course, you keep the redshirt on.
This is pretty much what I mean. If you take a guy who isn't quite ready yet and throw him into the fire along with ten other guys who you know are ready, I think it pressures your new guy to get it right, right away.
I'll take Lydon and Lawson as examples. They aren't the guys you want starting now, but are both guys who you'd hope would develop into starters for their Soph/Jun/Senior seasons. Why not toss them in as a t-Fr? Sure, it means they won't have a fifth year of being a Hokie, but it means they'll be closer to ready to play closer to now.
Not sure if I'm explaining myself well, but I do think that taking a guy who you think will be an eventual starter and redshirting him because he isn't quite as good as the others or isn't quite ready isn't in the best interest of the program or, even, the player.
To his credit, Meyer recruits a level of player that makes it easier for him to say this than others.
The fact that he can go to a recruit and offer immediate playing time and a legitimate shot at a roster spot, and can point to what he's already doing to back it up, plays a huge role in getting these star players on campus annually. Everyone goes there thinking they'll start Year 1.
Our current culture defers to upperclassmen over freshmen. It has its own merits, but it does steer kids away who are looking to have a legitimate chance of starting their first year. I would be willing to put money on it that this plays a major role in why we haven't been able to land 5* elite athletes in recent years despite being in an area saturated with them.
I think the pure number of freshmen we've played in the last 2 years discredits that opinion entirely.
we are playing a lot of freshmen right now because we have to, not necessarily because we want to.
Your argument is that we play seniority over youth. Now you say it's because we have to. Why do we have to? Because the underclassmen are better than the upperclassmen? Then that means we wouldn't be playing seniority over youth. Look at our WRs and tell me that we play seniority over youth. Donovan Riley is a senior, but he isn't a starter. Sure, on other positions, our 3 deep is all underclassmen because we have no upperclassmen there. But in positions where the underclassmen outperform the upperclassmen, they get the playing time.
Because they are the best option. If we tell recruits that if they come out and are the best player or earn their way into the 2 deep, they will play, they will respect that. We have a ton of TEs on the roster but we are playing our future Backer there as a true freshman in the short term. We are putting the best guys on the field, not necessarily the most experienced guys. It really seems to be a change in the motto for the program over the past 3 years or so.
I agree with this however I've think it's changed in recent years. i.e. the old running backs coach (completely drawing a blank on his name) did play seniority over talent. He thought it was a right of passage. Back then we had a great stable so it didn't matter too much but he still did it. Now we are getting more into the "if you can win the job in camp and practice, it doesn't matter what year you are"
Billy Hite?
Yes, it was once that way, but our coaches have seen talent as recruiting better players at their specific position has become more of a priority. So my point was that you can't say we have a culture of playing seniority over talent when recent history, which is what recruits will look at, dictates otherwise.
Of course he would publicly state that this is his official stance. It's quite easy to play true freshman when you have a top 5 recruiting class year after year. The problem for VT is that this creates voids at certain positions. We don't exactly have 4-5* depth at every position here, and it's very possible that not redshirting someone during a year when we actually have depth will cause us to have a glaring weakness in the defense or offense 4 years from then.
Or there's the Nick Saban/SEC way of thinking. "Hey, we've got a younger version of you. Out with the old, in with the new, no more scholarship for you."
we barely have 2 spots with 4-5* depth.. so yeah red shirting a bunch of 3*s and hoping that one year will get them ready to contribute. This 100% has to do with recruiting and its a smart move by UM and CS.. How many 5* kids want to red shirt ... I'd say less than 10%.
I'm shocked that they even came out and spoke about this as it is one of the most touchy subjects when recruiting these young kids.
I think it's the opposite...it's exactly what these kids want to hear, though you somewhat alluded to it yourself. Most kids think they're the best at their particular position, or have been told so by everyone around them. That's some of the allure of going to these big time programs, they'll play you against some of the best if you can hack it. They all think they can hack it. I'd say a large portion of blue chip prospects believe their own hype and expect to do 3 years and then the NFL. With the way recruiting can go, you can easily see 2 or more new players at your position every recruiting cycle. With programs like OSU, you have to display your dominance early or risk getting lost in the numbers. They are constantly stocking the cupboard.
nailed it.. all these kids think they're the best and good for them confidence is huge in football. However there's a difference between knowing you have talent and can play right away and being ignorant and saying screw it i'm only going where I can start right away and do me. The kids that have the later attitude normally flare out or transfer very quickly.
if telling a 4*-5* kid that he will get substantial playing time helps me get him I am 100% telling him that and maybe a little more... easier said than done
FTFY
Nailed it
It should also be pointed out just how many people left Texas when Strong arrived there. I think there was something I saw before the season that only 2 players or so were left from the 2013 recruiting class at Texas. After losing the AD, Strong will probably be out of a job by the end of next year if he can't make the playoffs. That's pretty much what Texas expects and will pay someone else to get.
IIRC, Most players were forced out/cut by Strong for violating team policy. There was a culture of complacency at Texas, Strong wanted a culture of accountability.
I doubt this. From the Texas fans I've spoken to, Texas AD was fired for alienating and nickle/diming fans, taking away parking passes and giving worse seats to fans who had donated tens of thousands of dollars over the last decade. He stopped giving free meals to coaches, and a bunch of other little things.
All the Texas fans I've talked to are happy with Strong. If he post 6/7 wins this season, and 8 next season, I think his job is secure for the season after.
Those fans may be angry but Texas has to do something. They lost money, a lot of it (for Texas) last year.
Many were forced out by Strong, but that is not a good sign. You can create a culture of accountability, but come in and be a hard ass and you'll rub some people the wrong way. And tes, the AD did many things wrong which is why he's gone. It's not an issue with Strong being disliked by fans. He was put in a position to fail. Expectations exceed what he can accomplish with the support he has. And there is an expectation that you put up more than 3 points and don't lose by 35 to Notre Dame. Restlessness will create "buyer's" remorse among the fans and you'll see him on the hot seat next year. Less than 7 wins this year will put him on the hot seat after last year's 6-7 season.
A link about redshirt trends here.
Redshirting to stockpile talent or smooth out the average talent level from year to year is a gamble for NFL-bound players who may leave early, as Beamer has mentioned in the past.
Look at the NFL draft trends for kids who leave early, they don't get drafted over 25% the time. In fact the number of players leaving early for the draft is actually looking to go down after spiking in the last few years.
Yes but we should look at the trend of four year seniors versus five year seniors and I guarantee you there are more NFL draft picks who are fourth year juniors/seniors than fifth year seniors because if you arent ready by the fourth year than the fifth year means nothing
I'd wager it varies by position.
QB has the largest learning curve, 5th year might help.
OL's need to build up size, 5 years might help
RB have short careers, and the learning curve is not as large, they should try to get to the NFL as quick as possible.
EDIT: obviously I tremendously over simplified it, but I think that's the concept.
But in both cases, we're talking about kids with NFL talent, how many underclassmen does VT have with NFL talent we redshirted that are going to leave early? Bucky comes to mind, but one could easily argue it was the year he spent redshirting that allowed his switch to TE that put him in a position to leave early.
Redshirting isn't something you can say you are against or for IMO. You have to evaluate each player. If they can contribute in a manner that helps the team win, play them. If they can't do that, redshirt them. I am not a fan of playing someone just to play them. Case and point this season for us, Settle has incredible potential but he is out of shape to play this year. He may help us 1 play and then get stuck on the field in a hurry up offense and hurt us. Redshirting him and getting him ready to be a full time player is key. Tremaine Edmunds is helping us on STs and on offense right now. Glad he is seeing the field. Before AM go hurt, Lydon probably was not in the right position to help us win games just because there were not enough practice reps to go around but now, the coaches see he can help the team and he will play.
The college football landscape has changed in the past 10-15 years a lot where kids are coming out of highschool physically ready at almost every position so they can see the field. I think Beamer's tendency to redshirt was from a decade ago but he has definitely changed that mentality in the past couple years. The slump in our recruiting a few years ago and the increase in it now also plays a big part in more young guys seeing the field I think. We have more young talent so they are beating the upperclassmen out for the spots.
This is spot on.
Typical Urban Meyer marketing spin. Claims "We don't redshirt anyone" yet he redshirts 50% or more of each class.
Stats--> 2014 31 commits.. Jesus that's a lot. only did the ranked guys/stared guys and that looks to be false.. He plays the kids in the skill positions and then redshirts the OL/DL.. Easier to get 4* 5* skilled guys with a high powered offense like OSU's so that definitely makes it easier to play them..
Raekwon McMillan LB- played 14 games
Damon Webb CB - Played in 5 games
Marshon Lattimore- redshirt due to inury late in fall camp
Dante Booker LB- played in 12 games
Jamarco Jones OL- played in 10 games
Curtis Samuel- RB- played in 14 games
Erick Smith- S- played 14 games special teams
Johnnie Dixon- WR- Played in 1 game tore knee got Medical redshirt.
Jalyn Holmes- DL- Played in 11 games
Demetrius Knox- OL- Redshirted
Kyle Berger- LB- Redshirted tore knee in fall camp
Parris Campbell-WR- Redshirted
Sam Hubbard- LB turned DE- Redshirted
Noah Brown- WR- Played in 11 games
Terry McLaurin-WR- Redshirted
Kyle Trout- OL- Redshirted
Malik Hooker- S- Redshirted
Dylan Thompson- OL- Redshirted
Brady Taylor- OL- Redshirted
for those counting:
played: 8
redshirted: 8
medical redshirt: 1
wildcard: officially redshirted due to fall injury, might have been redshirted anyway: 2
WR/DB: 4 played, 3 redshirted, 2 injury redshirt
RB/LB/TE: 3 played, 1 injury redshirt
DL/OL: 2 played, 5 redshirted
QB: none
I thought he said they had 31 guys that's only 19
the others weren't ranked by 247 or any other site.. probably walk-ons
You know, I'm really not worried about Ohio State's depth.
So to sum up (if I read it correctly):
Urban Meyer (at a top ten recruiting school) prefers his players be ready to play as true freshman and is disappointed when they aren't ready. But otherwise he is willing to redshirt.
Charlie Strong (at a top ten recruiting school) will play a freshman over an upperclassman IF they are 50/50 at the mid-point of the season. But otherwise he is willing to redshirt.
That's a couple of really gutsy stances on the issue that are sure to change how people view redshirting...
IMO, I believe we should plan on playing every freshman if they could help us win a game. If they come in with an injury and need to rehab, redshirt them. But IMO if they can help us win even by just playing in the fourth quarter, play them. These kids are in school year round so they have more than enough time to get a degree. So in short, if they can help the team win one game I'm all for it!
Redshirting has benefited this program GREATLY over the years. During our best years, most of our best players had redshirted. There is exceptions, but our staff has handled it pretty well over the years. Guys like Royal and Tyrod and Boykin etc, that we needed to win games, played. Look at how Groh and London managed their redshirts for an example of what not to do.
The last few years we havent had a chance to redshirt as many players as we usually would because of lack of depth. I believe it has hurt us a bit, but we seem to be recovering. Deon Clark, JC Coleman and Donovan Riley come to mind as guys we probably would have redshirted in the past that are now seniors.
The players that Meyer and Strong at Ohio State and Texas bring in are different than what we bring in. Not really a knock on the players we get, but theirs are probably more ready to play. A higher percentage is for sure. So comparing them to us is not a good comparison.
You know the starters can get hurt in the garbage snaps also as well as they can be rested by not playing in the garbage snaps so if you have a freshman who can only play garbage snaps maybe he doesn't improve that much but at least the starters get to rest. And any experience in a game situation it can only be beneficial. Redshirting makes little or no sense to be honest. When you have 85 guys for 24 positions, and you want to be on the top level of Division I are you really going to have a fifth-year senior play? Maybe if a guy was hurt and missed 1-2 whole seasons. If he wasn't good enough to go pro in the first 4 years chances are you've recruited someone as good or better at the position during those first 3-4 years. Unless you are Duke or Wake and you have a bunch of 2 star guys who in the fifth year are finally older than everyone else to be more competitive.
We've had several 5th year players make major contributions their senior year. Sometimes a players size or skillset doesn't translate well to the NFL, but they can still be a great college player