I'm wondering if our increased depth next year will gradually allow an impact freshman to make more of an impact right away. Yes, it's goofy, but my thought is that if you have experience at most positions, it is easier to have a single nOOb come on to the field, because you can cover for him and coach him, both on and off the field. When we have had very little depth and experience the last 3 years, you have a case of the blind leading the blind, and everyone being clueless. I have absolutely no coaching or playing experience, so I don't know if this idea is totally whack or not. Probably is, but that's why I'm not a coach.
Will Depth allows more Freshman to start?
Coach Will Depth is allowing freshman to start?
You beat me to it. +1 to you!
haha i love the grammar on the blog
Basically, you are arguing that freshman starting this year are mostly filling gaps, and not really playing as impact players. I think it's natural that where you have inexperience on Defense you are likely to be more cautious. Perhaps I could see a scenario where a situational pass-rusher next year could make a huge impact as a frosh (Beyer?). But overall, not sure how great the increase a freshman's impact will be next year. As is the boring answer, it depends on the player.
A freshman that is good enough is going to see the field and make an impact regardless of what our overall depth is like. I think we've definitely got a better shot of freshmen having a chance to play on the defensive end than offensively for the next couple years though, so hopefully the guys we're bringing in can play.
Well it's pretty whack, unless you don't like playing your most experienced players and winnin' and stuff.
One of the guys in a recent presser pointed out that you are learning learning learning all the time even when you're not on the field (even a starter is on the field only about 45-50 hours a year, right?). So if given a choice between teaching a redshirt freshman what to do and extending his usefulness to the team a year, and giving him the experience you describe, LET THE POOR KID PRACTICE FIRST.
A single n00b would probably do less damage than a whole n00b chorus line, but on average fewer freshmen would see the field.
If a freshman needs more support thanan available more experienced player they should NOT be playing. If there is depth, freshmen should redshirt.
Wasn't there a famous Bo quote that, in essence, meant you could count on a loss for every freshman you put on the field?
My vote would be to have enough depth that a true FR never saw the field again...
but I'm pretty sure Charles Woodson had a strong true freshman year. Hart and Henne are more recent examples of true freshmen who performed well enough to help the team.
Granted, with more depth at QB, Henne might not have been pressed into service so soon; however, it remains the case that there are some stud athletes out there that have the ability to have an immediate impact in college.
But that was a different era, when teams might have as many as 150 kids on scholarships. If you had that many kids to develop you better not need a Frosh starter. If he did, he was either a STUD or your program was in real trouble.
More than likely, it was the latter.
No. Depth causes less freshman to play, for obvious reasons. Less freshman need to play out of necessity .. unless you have a freshman Adrian Peterson, Mike Hart or Marcus Lattimore, then you play the freshman because he is better.
No. Depth is a notoriously fickle and unjust god; he shall sow discord and mistrust across the land. Such are not favorable conditions for the results ye seek.
Including woodson, marlin jackson and many other defensive players. All had their struggles. People remember a few plays he made against osu but forget he was giving up a ton of yds and a bunch of catches till he made that 1st int vs osu....then everything changed for him confidence wise that game....wich changed everything from then on for cwood.
The issue now is none of our current fr have great sr leadership out there with them.