http://www.dailyprogress.com/cavalierinsider/mendenhell-expects-recruits...
"I don't plan to redshirt," he said. "We're going to play freshmen as they come in. ... I like players that come in right from the beginning expecting to play, competing to play and having the mindset to contribute."
"I'm not a huge advocate [of early enrollment] from the standpoint of I think high school is an amazing time of life," Mendenhall said. "In general, the recruiting process continues to go earlier and earlier and earlier. And as an advocate on the board of directors for the [American Football Coaches Association], I keep trying to make it stay later and later and later. I think we make more and more mistakes as we go earlier and I think we entitle players earlier and earlier. I think that sets a really poor precedent."
These are going to be interesting times at LOLUVA. Also like to point out the Freudian slip in the headline.
Medenhell
Comments
I think ND does something similar.
It's probably just semantics. If a kid doesn't dress or see the field their first year, they can earn that 5th year. But if they suck, they don't get it. It could lead to them playing kids as true freshmen that they shouldn't. But it could also lead to them not having 5th year seniors on the team who stink.
If they keep recruiting like this, it doesn't matter how old the kids are.
The EE line is the most intriguing. That spring semester can be huge for a freshman to help them see the field and develop. Bronco won't have 20 year old freshmen coming in either. I think UVA is about to get a culture shock in the program.
Actually they will have one 20 yr old freshman. The RB from Hawaii, Taulapapa, is a Mormon and is going on a mission before coming for the wahoo experience.
Another interesting thing I saw in the newspaper today is that Taysom Hill, BYU QB is graduating this year with a season of eligibility left, and is considering transferring for his final year. LOLUVA is one place he is considering. Hill is a big QB who can run (when he's not injured). Mendenhall values this quality in his QB's, and said that ideally, he'd want his QB to be Thor....a "Thor-terback" (his words, thankfully, not mine). It's gonna be real interesting to see how a guy named Bronco is gonna fit in with the Zimma-ites here.
I thought going to LOLUVA was the mission.
No, the wahoo experience is more like this (noting that the resemblance of the driver and LOLUVA's new coach is kinda creepy.....and fitting):
I think it's more like this one, given that UVA's glory days were two centuries ago. Notice the similarity between Marty McFly and the VT football team.
Soooo, he doesn't like early enrollment and he doesn't like to redshirt kids either... ???
Well his past players would have been 45 when they graduated, if they were redshirted. /s
I don't think he knows what 17/18 year olds are like, since he's never had one play for him before. Probably doesn't realize that not all kids are ready for college ball with only 1 month of preseason practice. /s
EDIT: decided to add both of the "/s" before someone freaks out
And as far as his redshirt philosophy, it seems kind of risky in my mind. His freshmen at BYU were consistently older than the average P5 green-behind-the-ears freshmen, and I wonder if he's going to have to re-evaluate this policy later. He may be able to take advantage of the first cycle in the LOLUVA Coaching Fail chart though, and pull in some good recruits by being able to tell them that playing time is available.
It could also backfire bigtime. There's nothing wrong with a coach saying, "look, you're gonna compete for playing time, but if it's clear you won't be a major contributor, we're not going to screw up your development and play you a few snaps per game just on principle."
I'm sensing just a little bit spite
Not remotely. I've said repeatedly I have zero issues with how Lawson's situation was handled. He was the 2nd string QB, it had to be done. The situation wasn't ideal, but hey, that's life. I assume that's what you're referring to.
If anything, it's more of a dig at London and how he did things. He had a similar philosophy and there were definitely some kids who played simply because they had been promised playing time, and then they reach the end of their career and really miss that year of development they could have had.
Personally, I'm not a fan at all of Bronco's philosophy (shocker, I'm sure). I want kids to come in ready to compete, but the default shouldn't be to throw them out onto the field just because you're against redshirts. I just don't see who benefits from players being on the field when they have no idea what's going on and aren't physically ready to play the game. But hey, maybe it'll work out for him. Hope not, screw the Hoos.
I mean if he wants to run LOLUVA's football program like a pee-wee league team....then hey more power to him. I'm all for it. I have no problem if this drives their football program further into the ground and allows for another 12 years of dominance.
He's more than welcome to run the program into the ground and has my blessing to do so.
This. I can sort of get being against enrolling early, I don't really agree, but if he thinks that last semester of high school is important, cool.
But redshirting is such a useful tool for players for a lot of reasons. Beyond development of on the field skills, I feel like redshirting gives players a chance to acclimate to college life with a little bit less stress from the football side of things.
I view early enrollment as a great way to almost guarantee a kid gets his degree, it's three full semesters of college before the first game of your career.
And a possible head start on, if not completion of, a Masters.
But how many will graduate with eligibility, and actually learn enough to LOL UVA and become a graduate transfer? Could be why BM is against them.
Wait, where are you getting three?
Spring, Summer? Are you counting two summer sessions?
Yes two summer sessions.
Ah okay. I figured, but all of my summer classes were one session lasting 10 weeks.
Actually I'm in agreement with him regarding his redshirt philosophy. I don't think redshirting does a whole lot of good for anyone involved. I'd rather see someone redshirted because they didn't play all season, rather than redshirting someone with the plan that they don't play all season.
Can't find it, but I once read an article about how Pete Carroll sort of pioneered this approach at USC. His thought process was that he wanted to avoid recruiting players who had to redshirt. Anytime they did redshirt a player, it was a failure by the coaching staff to prepare that player for college football.
But doing this at USCw and at LOLUVA are totally different, academically. Where kids could quite possibly major in surfing technique at USCw, they wouldn't be able to skate by at hooU.
I think Frank had a pretty good philosophy about redshirting (post MV7). If the kid is ready to play and can contribute, play him, but if a redshirt year will help him, take one. I think redshirting is very profitable for OL, where it's difficult to contribute early. You can't have an across the board hard policy, it has to incorporate the individual.
Hmmm, not sure about that... Anthropology anyone?...
However, Pete Carroll's USC teams were able to conistently recruit players who are D-1 ready as true freshmen. UVa (or most schools) don't have that luxury.
Well, if you are able to attract the elite college ready players who are the cream of the crop, I guess that makes sense. I also see the sense in redshirting the players who don't end up playing so everyone is taking the whole thing seriously all year long. But the redshirt in and of itself isn't a bad thing. Considering the relative scarcity of those elite ready to go guys, player development may be a necessity for the rest of the college scene, and redshirting can be an important part of that development.
That's the biggest issue I see with it. With his stance on redshirting and mid-year enrollees (he doesn't like them), he almost seems to devalue his own staff's player development. I'm sure he doesn't actually mean that, but the message he's sending is as if he just expects every kid that falls in his lap to be a day-1 ACC player. That's just factually inaccurate.
This is an interesting take on both of these situations. I believe that his stance will change now that he's at UVA since like it was mentioned up above that most of his players will be much younger than he had at BYU and some will need a year to just get physically ready for college competition.
Sounds like a Groh or London. I like.
Ive felt like one of our advantages over them since the Groh era was our handling of redshirts. We essentially recruit the same players or the same type of players. A lot of them benefit from redshirt and we did a great job of that over the years. I felt we didnt do as well a job of that the last few years but maybe we just didnt have the depth. And as far as Lawson goes, I think that was a mistake. My opinion is he wont play this year and will probably transfer. I hope not, I think he could benefit from a redshirt this year and have some good years to really play.
I've heard from some peeps (#sauces) that he's really excited for this offense and thinks he can put up some big numbers. I think he'll stick around, the dude could be a first round QB if he sticks around and develops
If I was the coach of an ACC bottomfeeder with zero chance in next 2 to 3 years of being anything more, I would say the exact same thing and try to attract recruits that value playing right away higher than anything else. What other choice does he have?
this is all just context to the coaching situation he is in.
He is following Urban's philosophy.
This is an interesting move by BH that can pay dividends. Not encouraging a player to leave HS early may be something that makes him more approachable. Also, BH may pickup some blue chippers that he wouldn't have before b/c they know they're competing for playtime immediately.
I'm not saying we don't do similar things on a case-by-case basis, but this is BH's baseline philosophy. I'm still in a wait and see mode.
He's also used to 23 year old freshmen. I'm in wait and see mode as well but I have a feeling he's underestimating how many 18 year old kids there are out there who just aren't ready for college ball right away. I have my doubts and I'm not sure how long that philosophy will last in the ACC...
I know we all want to think that BH is a moron, but he's probably not. I don't think he's underestimating anything. He explicitly says that he doesn't want to promote a sense of entitlement in these kids by having them come on campus early. Either he's had young and/or non-mormon students (likely) or he's done his homework. I don't think you have to agree with his philosophy to at least admit that he probably understands the challenges of his new work environment.
I don't really have any issue with the part of his philosophy where he doesn't want to promote a sense of entitlement. That's fine. I just think that his idea of not taking kids early coupled with his statement that he doesn't want to redshirt anyone could lead to kids getting into their first season completely unprepared for the college game.
Everyone touts getting kids on campus early as a huge positive because they get that extra time to add weight to their frame and get accustomed to the demands of college before jumping right into football season. I don't think that is seen as a huge plus for no reason. A lot of coaches like to redshirt players who aren't ready to play because they need at least a full year to prepare themselves physically and mentally. It is rare for a true-freshman to step onto the football field and be a significant contributor right off the bat. There are plenty of good reasons supporting the general tendency of coaches to want kids to get on campus as early as possible and redshirt to ensure they are ready when they do finally step on that field.
Like I said, I'm in the wait and see boat on this. I'm not calling BM a moron. I'm not even trying to imply that. I have my doubts about his philosophy but that doesn't mean I think he's dumb. Only time will tell.
Do they go on mission out of HS? I thought they played 1-2 years, went on mission, then returned to finish eligibility- giving them numerous 24-25 yr old seniors
It varies. Anytime after 18.
https://www.lds.org/topics/missionary-preparation/when-should-i-serve?la...