Redshirt Changes

[JacketFromUGA]

College athletes competing in Division I football can participate in up to four games in a season without using a season of competition, the Division I Council decided this week at its meeting in Indianapolis.

Division I student-athletes have five years to compete in up to four seasons of competition. The new exception allows football players to preserve a season of competition if, for example, injuries or other factors result in them competing in a small number of games.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Not clear if this means coaches can selectively play guys in up to 4 games during their redshirt year and not lose a year of eligibility. It says "if injuries or other factors result in them competing in a small number of games."

 

[Gold1]

Not clear if this means coaches can selectively play guys in up to 4 games during their redshirt year and not lose a year of eligibility. It says "if injuries or other factors result in them competing in a small number of games."

This means they can play in any 4 games

 

[dressedcheeseside]

This means they can play in any 4 games

NM

 

[HurricaneJacket]

I wonder if this can be used to start getting freshmen qbs especially game speed experience.

 

[gt13]

I wonder if it can be used to retroactively give active players another year of eligibility (ex: Taquon appeared in less than 4 games in 2016, has not used his redshirt year)

 

[1939hotmagic]

Over the years, I'd hoped the NCAA would change its rules to allow players, during an otherwise-redshirt season, to play in up to three JV games without losing a year of eligibility because, under the old rule even participation in a JV game would've counted just as much as participation in a varsity game. The new rule change not only would address my old wish, but obviously goes further. Which is great, particularly for the kids who are "just not quite ready for prime time," but are oh so close; at least the coaches now can get them a little game action in blowouts. (That said, I would enjoy seeing JV programs reestablished, even if only for one- or two-game "seasons. Have a JV game during a weekend in which the varsity has a bye or is on the road, and -- for programs with a history, like the old Tech and UGA "frosh" and later JV game, bring those games back as well.

OK, I'm through with the wishes and dreams stuff. Fun while it lasted.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

This means they can play in any 4 games

I think the INTENT was that if, for reasons of health, or similar unexpected reasons, a player only plays in four games, he can receive a redshirt. But if that is the INTENT and it was not spelled out, then it would seem to be wide open to any reason for only playing in four games.

 

[YJMD]

4 is a lot it seems. I like this. Probably helps us more than the blue bloods.

 

[Gold1]

I think the INTENT was that if, for reasons of health, or similar unexpected reasons, a player only plays in four games, he can receive a redshirt. But if that is the INTENT and it was not spelled out, then it would seem to be wide open to any reason for only playing in four games.

I'm just saying that what the rule is a player can play in any 4 games no matter what situation and wouldn't count against them

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

I'm just saying that what the rule is a player can play in any 4 games no matter what situation and wouldn't count against them

Yeah, that is what they said, but I'd be willing to bet that's not what they meant.

 

[alagold]

I think it amazing that they go from basically NO play (except certain injuries) to playing in FOUR FULL games.It will be interesting who is helped most by this..

 

[Animal02]

I think it amazing that they go from basically NO play (except certain injuries) to playing in FOUR FULL games.It will be interesting who is helped most by this..

They should have limited it to something like 8 quarters. That would allow them to play in the last few minutes of blowout games, or two full games. Four full gmaes is a lot.

 

[gtwcf]

I wonder if it can be used to retroactively give active players another year of eligibility (ex: Taquon appeared in less than 4 games in 2016, has not used his redshirt year)

Appears to be no

 

[FightWinDrink]

This is a good change

 

[Skeptic]

This means they can play in any 4 games

If this is the case, are there still rules about how many dressed, or traveling? We may look at it as four games, but coaches will look at it and see a third of a season of real-time game experience, and then four years of eligibility remaining. In short no pretense at getting players graduated in four years if possible. Take all five with the ramifications of that. The NCAA screws up twice every time: once in making a rule. The second in changing a rule. Coaches just won big time. (And with it a recruiting tool.)

 

[iceeater1969]

4 is a lot it seems. I like this. Probably helps us more than the blue bloods.

Should but.
1our guys leave early due in part to great job opportunities.
2 we dont play the back ups due to - missed assignments are critical in our complicated offense.

Will require a change in phylosophy, but could help

 

[alentrekin]

Means we could see some quality james Graham time this year.

 

[CuseJacket]

A few thoughts...

1) This could make lower tier bowl games more interesting i.e., why not give some young guys reps?

2) Would any teams view this as an opportunity to specialize roles for incoming freshmen e.g., COFH, could you in theory have a freshman sit out all year and get really good at one thing, whether it's a pass rush, punt return, trick play, etc. and save it for the Saturday after Thanksgiving? Potentially very challenging to scout those players, tendencies and line-ups.

3) This rule change makes it easier to avoid play guys who are playing hurt/on the verge of greater injury. A guy like Connor Hansen wouldn't have had his shirt burned last year, but more importantly he might have been inserted in the lineup sooner to relieve starters and our thin OL from having to push through.

 

[JacketFromUGA]

A few thoughts...

1) This could make lower tier bowl games more interesting i.e., why not give some young guys reps?

2) Would any teams view this as an opportunity to specialize roles for incoming freshmen e.g., COFH, could you in theory have a freshman sit out all year and get really good at one thing, whether it's a pass rush, punt return, trick play, etc. and save it for the Saturday after Thanksgiving? Potentially very challenging to scout those players, tendencies and line-ups.

3) This rule change makes it easier to avoid play guys who are playing hurt/on the verge of greater injury. A guy like Connor Hansen wouldn't have had his shirt burned last year, but more importantly he might have been inserted in the lineup sooner to relieve starters and our thin OL from having to push through.

So #2 is Tua?