ADVERTISEMENT

Redshirts burned

nothingkevin

Walk On
Dec 14, 2004
333
20
18
what redshirts have been been burned thus far? i've got stanley morgan, aaron williams, dedrick young.

any others?
 
OK thanks. wish a couple of those fellas coulda been held back a yr but lack of depth sometimes forces them into action.
 
This negative could end up being a huge positive for this years recruiting class. Kids and parents will understand that they can honestly get serious playing time right away. We need an infusion of talented serious minded players that want to win NOW!
 
Last edited:
Ozigbo is a big body. Hadn't really been paying attention, but when I saw him was like man. Big man.
I think the days of a bunch of marginally athletic guys covering and returning kicks are numbered for our special teams. Guys are gonna play IF they are physically ready and the best options for special teams. Lets face it, Devine is probably not going to be that "difference maker" hard to replace RB. BUT he is a smart physical athletic specimen that can contribute right away while giving you another option on your travel roster in case of an injury. Play him and then go recruit the next guy to take his place.
 
This negative could end up being a huge positive for this years recruiting class. Kids and parents will understand that they can honestly get serious playing time right away. We need an infusion of talented serious minded players that want to win NOW!

I think there's pro's and con's, not just necessarily "negative" in not redshirting. There'll be instances where a 4th year player would have had bigger impact coming back for a 5th year. And if a player is really good, draft worthy, are they gonna stick around for a final year of eligibility. But, it's also good to be bringing more new faces into the program each year, more opportunities for good players. And as you pointed, kids want to play, and that can help recruiting efforts. If a 5th year senior is not a major contributor, are they just taking up spot limiting the number of new recruits, potential contributors. Redshirting versus playing is a good topic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: timnsun
I think there's pro's and con's, not just necessarily "negative" in not redshirting. There'll be instances where a 4th year player would have had bigger impact coming back for a 5th year. And if a player is really good, draft worthy, are they gonna stick around for a final year of eligibility. But, it's also good to be bringing more new faces into the program each year, more opportunities for good players. And as you pointed, kids want to play, and that can help recruiting efforts. If a 5th year senior is not a major contributor, are they just taking up spot limiting the number of new recruits, potential contributors. Redshirting versus playing is a good topic.
IF a kid can play you play him. You can't be afraid of not being able to recruit a guy to replace him and redshirting a scholarship athlete just eats up a scholarship year. The more bodies you bring through your program, the better the chance that you can find guys that make a difference for your team.
 
What dinglefritz said. The redshirt IMO is overrated. It can be useful, but modern college football is a numbers game. The more players you can get on campus on your team, the more you can mitigate the "bust" or "underperformer" factor on your roster.

Not saying redshirts are useless, just not necessary in a lot of cases.
 
What dinglefritz said. The redshirt IMO is overrated. It can be useful, but modern college football is a numbers game. The more players you can get on campus on your team, the more you can mitigate the "bust" or "underperformer" factor on your roster.

Not saying redshirts are useless, just not necessary in a lot of cases.
Wanna know valuable redshirt seasons are? See michigan st. In general, the more players you can redshirt...the better.
 
Wanna know valuable redshirt seasons are? See michigan st. In general, the more players you can redshirt...the better.
Yeah and IOWA STATE redshirts a lot of guys too. It really depends on the individual player, the depth chart and your ability to recruit another guy. Michigan State until their fairly recent success had trouble recruiting enough quality players. IF you have guys that are maybe athletically or mentally not there AND you think they can be a 2-3 year starter later that isn't going to leave early, then fine. The issue still comes back to THEY ARE EATING UP A SCHOLARSHIP WITHOUT CONTRIBUTING other than maybe on scout team. Its an interesting topic to me because the whole scholarship numbers and bodies through the program is critical with the scholarship limits. Snyder used to let KSU suck for a year or two by redshirting a bunch of guys and then he'd get a good year or two out of them with good teams and then repeat the cycle. I just think for where we're at right now, that IF you have a physically and mentally ready to play guy like Divine, Morgan, etc, then you play them if they can help you. It does no good to redshirt kids like that. Use em and then do your work to replace so that you always have that pipeline of new talent that maybe delivers a 3 year starter all conference kind of guy like Morgan looks like he may end up being.
 
High school football is a whole different beast from years past. The schemes are better suited to having a seamless transition to the college game. Then there's the weight training programs that produces a bigger faster kid. I see the typical redshirt as something of the past.
What dinglefritz said. The redshirt IMO is overrated. It can be useful, but modern college football is a numbers game. The more players you can get on campus on your team, the more you can mitigate the "bust" or "underperformer" factor on your roster.

Not saying redshirts are useless, just not necessary in a lot of cases.

The players are better developed physically and more importantly mentally. High school players are better prepared to step into a college offense day one. This is all true but having an older more mature player will pay dividends. Just ask BYU.
 
Wanna know valuable redshirt seasons are? See michigan st. In general, the more players you can redshirt...the better.

Actually for the past few years under BO, Nebraska by far had the most RS players on our roster in the B10 and we still do right now btw, yes more than MSU by almost double digits. Red shirting is not the end all, if your staff does not recruit, develop properly and all that, all red shirting is going to do, is take an extra spots and limit your scholly numbers in years.

"If" you are red shirting properly, you shouldnt have near as many red shirts as we have had the last 7 years like under the previous regime especially when you are recruiting in the top 3rd if your conference. Until this year MSU was recruiting below Nebraska and they were recruiting to a specific "system" of how they did things, which meant their players needed more RS to be developed more. I think you will find that MSU going forward if they continue to recruit in the top 3rd of the conference will not be Red shirting quite as many players, I can guarantee you we at NU going forward are not going to have to RS as many players as our recruiting, development, and overall coaching IQ is much higher now than it was before.
 
IF a kid can play you play him. You can't be afraid of not being able to recruit a guy to replace him and redshirting a scholarship athlete just eats up a scholarship year. The more bodies you bring through your program, the better the chance that you can find guys that make a difference for your team.

Nailed it.
 
I think you recruit each kid with the intention of them playing as a freshmen. Or at the very least that is how a coach should sell it.
 
Some positions also tend to require a RS more often than others. OL and DL need a RS season to gain size and strength much more often than WR's and DB's.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tulsa Tom
I think redshirts are useful for the middle 1/3 of your roster. The year of training gains that group some physical ability and mental maturity. This allows them to play like the top 1/3 of your roster and improves competition. Redshirting the bottom 1/3 of your roster does nothing to improve competition at the top where it matters most, and thus is a waste of a scholarship IMO.
 
Red shirting players is good when you can do it, but it often means that he was not physically ready (injury, out of shape, etc.), is a project, or you did a good job at his position in prior recruiting years. Unless you are talking about elite-elite players, if a guy 3 months out of high school can come in and play significant minutes, there were some serious misses in prior recruiting cycles.

I agree with many though, best man plays regardless or age.
 
ADVERTISEMENT