The CardBoard
2017 Redshirts? - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: 2017 Redshirts? (/thread-14091.html)

Pages: 1 2 3

Re: 2017 Redshirts? Depth chart from Saturday Blitz - ADPATERSON - 08-22-2017

Fansided SBlitz posted their guestimate of Depth chart today
They have Meeks and Holder starting at CB, which makes sense. 
I think their lineup on Def is... defensible.
They have Wilson ahead of Fanaika at OG.

https://saturdayblitz.com/2017/08/22/stanford-football-projected-depth-chart-2017/

Re: 2017 Redshirts? - OutsiderFan - 08-22-2017

(08-22-2017, 12:32 PM)CrazedZooChimp link Wrote:Well, we also don't know what Harry's trajectory would look like if he had had fewer injuries the last couple years. Maybe if he'd been 100% both years he'd have been eve better than Solly  :o

Um, no. 

Re: 2017 Redshirts? Depth chart from Saturday Blitz - CornFed - 08-22-2017

(08-22-2017, 12:49 PM)ADPATERSON link Wrote:Fansided SBlitz posted their guestimate of Depth chart today
They have Meeks and Holder starting at CB, which makes sense. 
I think their lineup on Def is... defensible.
They have Wilson ahead of Fanaika at OG.

https://saturdayblitz.com/2017/08/22/stanford-football-projected-depth-chart-2017/

Warning:  Editors on our board should NOT read this article.  They will be trapped in an infinite "red pencil" loop, which may  eventually lead to insanity.

Re: 2017 Redshirts? - BostonCard - 08-23-2017

(08-22-2017, 11:14 AM)Goose link Wrote:[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17193.msg197549#msg197549 date=1503423509]
This isn't that friggin difficult.

If a player will help you win, you play them.  If they aren't good enough to crack the two-deep, you don't.

You don't play them because they might not be around for their fourth or fifth year.
You don't play them because playing them today because it will give them experience.
You don't play them because of potential.
You sure as hell don't play them on the basis of their recruiting rankings.

Conversely, you don't redshirt them because you want to preserve a fifth year that may never come.

It's simple... does playing the freshman make you a better team?  Sometimes it's hard to judge, but that is the standard, and should be the only standard.

BC
I agree that you should, in fact must, play a freshman if you believe it will make you a better team. I don't think anyone would disagree with that. What I think we are talking more about here is cases where the player would see action in special cases or in garbage time. Those cases don't affect how good a team you are ATM, but could affect how good a team you have the future (where the "future" is defined as any time from next week to the end of the players eligibility). In those cases, there may be some tradeoffs, and those tradeoffs CAN be difficult, given the number of variables involved. Some guys clearly aren't ready, either physically, mentally, or both. Some guys are almost ready, but you don't really "need" them. They may benefit from the experience gained in garbage time, but will the benefit be large enough to lose a year of eligibility? Will it help player motivation? It certainly will allow the coaching staff to see how the player performs in "live" situations. One might argue that these are corner cases, but these cases are the hard ones.
[/quote]

Would you really burn a redshirt just to have a freshman play in garbage time?  There are a lot of implied assumptions in your argument that may or may not be true.

Again, I think the best criteria is the simplest... do they help you win today because they are better than the upperclassmen who would otherwise play if the player didn't redshirt.

BC

Re: 2017 Redshirts? - OutsiderFan - 08-23-2017

Just getting this on record again...

The term "burning a redshirt" is only accurate in the proper context.  If a player is planned to be redshirted, and then say midway through the season or later, the coaching staff has a True Frosh play out of desperation, yes, the term "burn a redshirt" applies.

But if a guy is ready to play and contribute as a True Frosh within the first few games of a season, then a redshirt isn't being burned as much as being preserved in the case of a season-ending injury. 

Of course, Harrison Phillips is an example of both a redshirt being burned (as the plan was to redshirt him as a True Frosh until injuries and lack of depth forced him to play late in the season), and preserved in the event a season was lost to injury (when he was injured and lost for the season as a Sophomore at Northwestern).

The point is, sometimes a redshirt has no reason to be used, so burning it isn't an accurate connotation.  The term only has merit to be interpreted negatively when a player who the coaches preferred to redshirt, is forced to play as a result of injuries and lack of depth.

Re: 2017 Redshirts? - Goose - 08-23-2017

(08-23-2017, 11:01 AM)Boston Card link Wrote:Again, I think the best criteria is the simplest... do they help you win today because they are better than the upperclassmen who would otherwise play if the player didn't redshirt.

BC
I think you are right. Shaw also thinks you are right, and has said so on several occasions. However, I believe the reason you are right is not that "Simplest is best". In the case of freshmen, simplest is best because if you err on the side of caution and don't play them, nothing is lost. We are talking about a guy who isn't good enough (yet) to say that he for sure makes the team better. No need to rush, be wrong, and give up a year of eligibility. Others on the board seem  to believe that it would be an advantage to play Little/Sarell as Ogres or as field goal protection irrespective of that making us a better team. I don't agree with that. OTOH, when/if they become as asset that the team needs, even if it is game 6, they should play. Not before, because there is a cost.
If a player has already had a redshirt year, the situation is different. There is no opportunity cost to giving them a look, and it may be worthwhile. In that case, the real question is who to look at, which, as you say, may not be simple. But in that case, not doing so may not be optimal. It may make you better next year without hurting you this year. YMMV.

Re: 2017 Redshirts? - BostonCard - 08-23-2017

(08-23-2017, 12:41 PM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:But if a guy is ready to play and contribute as a True Frosh within the first few games of a season, then a redshirt isn't being burned as much as being preserved in the case of a season-ending injury. 

Technically correct, but I think everyone on this board knows what I meant and uses it in the same way.  You technically don't burn a redshirt so much as "'burn' a year of eligibility".

BC

Re: 2017 Redshirts? - Durty Nelly - 08-24-2017

Appears that Wedington, Sarell, Little, and Parkinson will play, as they are all on the depth chart.  My take from this is that Wedington and Parkinson already are displaying great play making abilities.

All others look on the path to redshirt.