Question - When do you try to get a freshman time?
So, this thought came up to me while considering Devin Gardner, and I thought I would put it all to you. We all know you use a redshirt if a kid isn't ready to play, is injured, or is a freshman at a position of depth. So here's a question that occurred to me.
What would you do if you had a freshman early enrollee who was obviously very talented, had worked very hard, was ready to play at least a limited role, and came to you telling you that playing is his reward for working so hard, it's the only reason he worked so hard, and he wants to play, but you had plenty of upper classmen at the position? The kid is realistic about his pro chances, in that, if he's good enough to be a pro, three/four years spent starting versus two/three years starting and a year with limited playing time isn't going to make a difference, and so there will be no convincing him to save that show off time.
What do you do? You know he won't hurt the team to play, but he's also not going to be a tangible improvement over the upper classmen. Do you tell him no, and in doing so, possibly remove or reduce his motivation for trying? Do you tell him yes and lose depth at the position four years down the road to motivate him this year, and at the cost of playing time for your upper classmen?
August 20th, 2010 at 8:20 AM ^
You play freshman when you have to.
August 20th, 2010 at 8:23 AM ^
red shirt season -> improved mechanics -> more fruitful starting seasons -> improved pro prospects -> DOLLARS
August 20th, 2010 at 8:26 AM ^
I say it comes down to how well he is performing compared to the upperclassmen. In DG's case, I personally would rather have him redshirt just because I think that extra year will help him tremendously. Next year, he could come out swinging and dominate the Big Ten. But I do agree with you in the sense that he is obviously working hard and you don't want to diminish his confidence.
August 20th, 2010 at 8:28 AM ^
...and explain to him that sometimes you have to do whats better for the TEAM. If its sitting and putting distance between him and the upper classmen so he can shine for longer, or playing a limited role the first year. The TEAM is whats important.
p.s. That is something a lot of kids have trouble grasping today, but it is a valuable lesson.
August 20th, 2010 at 8:30 AM ^
In this instance, "collect underpants" is "redshirt."
August 20th, 2010 at 8:35 AM ^
I've thought about this also. If he can help the team now - you play him now. If he turns out to be a NFL caliber player there is no guarentee he'll stay with the team for his full four years anyways, as a couch I would think you would want to get as much use out of him as possible if he's ready to play and needed.
However, in this particular case, unless he is clearly ahead of Tate and is a lock for the number 2 position, then redshirting is probably the best answer.
August 20th, 2010 at 8:38 AM ^
as a corch.
August 20th, 2010 at 8:39 AM ^
my bad. I did mean a corch
August 20th, 2010 at 9:09 AM ^
and if he earns the right for PT, you give it to him.
August 20th, 2010 at 9:19 AM ^
Are we saying that in three years, or four years, he's going to be ready for the pros whether or not he redshirts the season? That is, whatever timeframe he's on for going to the NFL, it won't be affected at all by a redshirt?
In that case, it's a no-brainer: he plays. What good does it do you to save a season of eligibility if he's not gonna use it? You have promises to keep.
August 20th, 2010 at 9:46 AM ^
I am hoping that DG is the next coming of Greatness just as much as everyone else, but let's not overdo it. The kid is a freshman, and while he has the tools to play I think it would most likely be a step back right now. Look at the season with Tate last year who was born and bred to be a Qb.
By the middle of the season teams had us pretty much scouted because Tate (and DRob) weren't capable of using the entire playbook. According to RR, even now they don't have a grasp on the entire playbook.
When I hear these conversations I think about Beano and his prediction of Powlus winning 2 Heisman trophies. I'm not saying DG won't do that. But let's temper the enthusiasm just a bit for a kid who hasn't taken a snap against a D1 defense that isn't (mostly) wearing wings on their helmets. I'd rather he win 2 Heismans en route to B10 and national championships his Jr and Sr years because that would mean that Tate and/or DRob were good enough to keep him on the bench.
August 20th, 2010 at 9:48 AM ^
You didn't pay any attention to what I said at all. I said the question came to me while THINKING about Gardner, but the question has nothing to do with Gardner. I don't even know if he's asked for playing time. It's a general question, friend.
August 20th, 2010 at 9:49 AM ^
Usually you have your players do their time during the off-seas... oh wait, you meant MIchigan players not MSU? During easier games or games you have a commanding lead in for playing time.
August 20th, 2010 at 10:15 AM ^
He transfers, and then the problem solves itself?
August 20th, 2010 at 10:28 AM ^
When are we gonna know what freshmen have redshirted? Sorry if this was a stupid question.
August 20th, 2010 at 10:32 AM ^
We won't know for SURE until after the season. They're redshirted if they haven't played in any games, and they don't have to declare someone a redshirt before the season starts. The coaches may be planning to redshirt someone until another player goes down and they're forced to play him.
August 20th, 2010 at 10:34 AM ^
If they haven't played ==> Redshirt.
August 20th, 2010 at 10:49 AM ^
The QB is the most important position in RR Offense and therefore the team. Devin isn't being Redshirted because they need all three QB's to push eachother to be better with great competition. RR can't afford to Redshirt him this year because its possible with a poor year the alumni and big doners will be calling for his head. If Denard or Tate emerge as the clear cut starter at some point this season, solidifying them for next season, then I think Devin is Redshirted next year to get some class separation and refine his skills. Devin could also win the Job at some point between this year and the next-------then its his team, and he won't need a Redshirt.
August 20th, 2010 at 10:51 AM ^
You play whoever is the best player at a position and whoever gives you the best shot at winning. Football is the most team dependent sport and you can't have a good cohesive unit if you placate a players ego. Now, when it comes to certain positions, like running back, it becomes necessary to give snaps to multiple players. In that case, an underclassman should probably get some snaps even if they aren't "better" than the upperclassmen to give the others a rest and decrease the chance of injury.
When it comes to quarterback, there shouldn't be very much substittution at all, in an ideal setting. The real question for Gardner, assuming he isn't flat out better than Forcier and Robinson, is should he get some snaps in the fourth quarter of a blowout. If he is good enough and has been busting his but in practice, you could make the argument that it will get him some good experience and decrease the risk of a stupid injury to your starter. Of course, you have to weigh that against the value for the player and the team of an extra year of eligibility. Personally, I'd rather see Kennedy get the UMass fourth quarter snaps than Gardner.
August 20th, 2010 at 2:49 PM ^