[CTcard]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17318.msg199254#msg199254 date=1504661829]
Or the participation report was wrong.  It's been known to happen.

BC

Especially when two players wear the same number, as Richardson and A-W did last year.
[/quote]

This is just to agree and confirm.
The posted game participation reports are often wrong, with the most common error confusing players wearing the same number. Last year we apparently had three guys wearing #19: JJAW, Richardson, and Ryan Gaertner - a walk on senior CB.
It's rare to have three guys sharing a number and rare to have two guys who play on the same side of the ball. Since having two guys with the same number on the field at the same time is a penalty, having two guys from the offense with the same number pretty much means the staff knows one won't be playing.

EDIT - already corrected but I am leaving it up to comment on the oddity of three guys with one number on last year's roster.

-------------
Back to the substance of the post.

I am also surprised that only four frosh played last year. Despite the common wisdom that Shaw won't play frosh, that seems a very small number to me. And it was a big class.
25 signed - 2 going on mission + 1 from previous year (Fox) = 24 frosh?

Of the four, Herbig was obviously important, and McNitzky was discussed as going to play from the get-go - so I assume the staff thought his long snapping skills very necessary (as you noted).

That leaves Stewart and Robinson.

I think that Stanford often plays a frosh receiver because a) we use a surprising number of them for a team that doesn't pass much, and b) just lately that is among our toughest positions to recruit (along with DL).
Stewart wasn't particularly highly rated by the services, but we did beat out Michigan for him.
Going into last season we had three WR who had played significant downs: Rector, Irwin, Owusu. I can see why they were looking for a fourth, though it turns out that JJAW is the guy who came through. I don't think the coaches knew that is how things would shake out.

[By the way, going into this season the WR situation looked more dire from the outside. Only JJAW and Irwin had really done anything, and of course JJAW was(is?) injured. But with Stewart appearing to be ready, Weddington emerging, and Parkinson effectively playing as a WR, that situation has at least calmed down.]

Robinson is an interesting case. He was our second highest rated recruit (at least by some services, I didn't check them all), and our highest rated guy who came in healthy (the higher rated guy being Kaden Smith). The coaches also appeared set to play Robinson from the outset, which given the depth we had/have at LB made me wonder if that was a recruiting promise. I thought he looked athletic but a little lost out there. Thus this is the not-redshirting decision I most question, though if that is what it took to get him then by all means.

[CTcard]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17318.msg199254#msg199254 date=1504661829]
Or the participation report was wrong.  It's been known to happen.

BC

Especially when two players wear the same number, as Richardson and A-W did last year.
[/quote]

This is just to agree and confirm.
The posted game participation reports are often wrong, with the most common error confusing players wearing the same number. Last year we apparently had three guys wearing #19: JJAW, Richardson, and Ryan Gaertner - a walk on senior CB.
It's rare to have three guys sharing a number and rare to have two guys who play on the same side of the ball. Since having two guys with the same number on the field at the same time is a penalty, having two guys from the offense with the same number pretty much means the staff knows one won't be playing.

EDIT - already corrected but I am leaving it up to comment on the oddity of three guys with one number on last year's roster.

-------------
Back to the substance of the post.

I am also surprised that only four frosh played last year. Despite the common wisdom that Shaw won't play frosh, that seems a very small number to me. And it was a big class.
25 signed - 2 going on mission + 1 from previous year (Fox) = 24 frosh?

Of the four, Herbig was obviously important, and McNitzky was discussed as going to play from the get-go - so I assume the staff thought his long snapping skills very necessary (as you noted).

That leaves Stewart and Robinson.

I think that Stanford often plays a frosh receiver because a) we use a surprising number of them for a team that doesn't pass much, and b) just lately that is among our toughest positions to recruit (along with DL).
Stewart wasn't particularly highly rated by the services, but we did beat out Michigan for him.
Going into last season we had three WR who had played significant downs: Rector, Irwin, Owusu. I can see why they were looking for a fourth, though it turns out that JJAW is the guy who came through. I don't think the coaches knew that is how things would shake out.

[By the way, going into this season the WR situation looked more dire from the outside. Only JJAW and Irwin had really done anything, and of course JJAW was(is?) injured. But with Stewart appearing to be ready, Weddington emerging, and Parkinson effectively playing as a WR, that situation has at least calmed down.]

Robinson is an interesting case. He was our second highest rated recruit (at least by some services, I didn't check them all), and our highest rated guy who came in healthy (the higher rated guy being Kaden Smith). The coaches also appeared set to play Robinson from the outset, which given the depth we had/have at LB made me wonder if that was a recruiting promise. I thought he looked athletic but a little lost out there. Thus this is the not-redshirting decision I most question, though if that is what it took to get him then by all means.