Interesting Rule Proposal

[jchem1995]

What do you all think?

 

Proposed college football rule would let redshirting freshmen play in up to 4 games

5

This would be very interesting, if it were to pass.

by Morgan Moriarty  May 16, 2017, 3:21pm EDT

•  TWEET
•  
•  SHARE
•  
•  PIN
•  
•  REC

 

Photo by Wesley Hitt/Getty Images

Remember how up in arms we were about players skipping bowl games, most notably running backs Leonard Fournette and Christian McCaffrey last December? Now, NFL teams proved that they didn’t care that either of these guy sat out during their bowl games, with Fournette going No. 4 overall to the Jacksonville Jaguars and McCaffrey taken at eighth overall to the Carolina Panthers.

 

But there’s a rule being proposed that could settle down the masses who call for star players to play in their teams’ final games of the season. According to Fox Sports’ Stewart Mandel, a new rule is being proposed to the NCAA by the American Football Coaches Association that, if passed, would allow players to play in up to four games during a season without burning their redshirt year. So technically speaking, head coaches could save their four-star signees and beak them out just in time for bowl games, and the player could still redshirt that season.

“I think that would be pretty intriguing to some of the fan bases,” said AFCA executive director Todd Berry, via Fox Sports. “Which might legitimize some of those bowl games and make them more interesting.”

Following the AFCA’s board meetings last week in Phoenix, Berry said that while McCaffrey and Fournette made headlines, players shutting it down before a lower-tier bowl game is “not a new thing.” While those particular stars dealt with legitimate health issues last season, others in the past might develop a “magic injury” right before the bowl.

 

If this new proposal gets passed, this could greatly help teams that have to burn a former blue-chip’s redshirt after a starter goes down with a season-ending injury. We saw this play out with Ole Miss quarterback Shea Patterson, with the former five-star recruit having to burn his redshirt last season after Chad Kelly went down with a torn ACL. Patterson ended up throwing for 880 yards and six touchdowns, along with a win over Texas A&M as the Rebels’ starter in the final three games of the year, but Kelly’s injury cost Patterson a season of eligibility. A season in which Ole Miss finished 5-7, mind you.

As it stands, a player burns his redshirt the second he enters a game. He can only get it back if he suffers a season-ending injury before he plays in four games.

West Virginia also had to use former three-star signee Martell Pettaway last season after Mountaineers running back Justin Crawford suffered an ankle injury in the second-to-last game of the season.

 

“We really haven’t addressed the redshirt rule in quite some time,” WVU head coach Dana Holgorsen said during last week’s Big 12 meetings, via Fox Sports. “We’re playing way more games than we used to — there used to be a 10-game season. They’re looking at it, and I would support it.”

Holgorsen isn’t the only head coach to think the proposal is a good idea. During the SEC’s spring meeting teleconference, several head coaches were in favor of it. Here’s what a few had to say, as transcribed by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

Nick Saban, Alabama: “I absolutely would be in favor of that. One of the most difficult things for players is they can’t play at all when they’re freshmen to be able to gain a redshirt year. They all want to play. This would give them an opportunity to play some and would actually enhance their development to some degree. With the numbers we have right now and the number of games we’re playing, you might be able to play a few more players in some of those games. That would help other players on your team as well.”

 

Hugh Freeze, Ole Miss: “I love the new proposal out there. I think it’s needed with everything that’s going on in college athletics. The season’s getting longer. The more physical play, the year-round the toll that’s on [players’] bodies. It’s a great option if you can play freshmen or a kid that’s going through a redshirt year in four games or less. I think it’s a very positive and needed change we need to make.”

Mark Stoops, Kentucky: “I think that rule change would make a lot of sense. We were in that situation last year when we had a quarterback hurt early in the year, Drew Barker. We played most of the year with our backup quarterback being a redshirt guy. We decided to keep that redshirt on Gunnar Hoak in Game 11. Played our third-team quarterback, who did some good things. But it was a situation that could’ve benefited us a year ago. It can protect the player in a redshirt year, it can help gain experience for the following year.”

This rule would also do away with the need for applying for medical redshirts, which the NCAA now approves for players who apply after they lose a season(s) due to injury. Currently, a player can receive a medical redshirt if he's competed in fewer than 30 percent of the games in a season or three games, whichever is greater. These medical redshirts in the past have given players up to seven years of eligibility.

As far as the timeline for this goes, the newly formed Division I Football Competition Committee will talk about the proposal during the upcoming May 16 meeting. If everyone is in agreement, then the proposal gets forwarded to Division I’s Football Oversight Committee, chaired by Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby. That committee could then formally sponsor legislation so it can be considered by the Division I Council. If that happens, there’s a chance it could go up for vote during January’s NCAA convention.

We’ll see what the future holds for this proposal. From the early sounds of it, this thing could have a good chance of picking up some steam in the upcoming months.

[NewEnglandBull]

Well if the hillbilly conference likes it I am sure it will happen. 

[RJWGoBulls]

I think it could potentially mean we lose a recruiting tactic of telling recruits that they can come here and play right away, will allow all of the big programs to be able to sell that vision more realistically (at least partially)

[Ionbull]

31 minutes ago, RJWGoBulls said:

I think it could potentially mean we lose a recruiting tactic of telling recruits that they can come here and play right away, will allow all of the big programs to be able to sell that vision more realistically (at least partially)

Actually didn't think about that proposition. Four games seems like a lot considering the regular season is only twelve games long. I liked the idea that SBNation brought up during Bowl Season, that RS should have the ability to be burned with no penalty during Bowl Games. As much as I like the idea, if they are going to do that why not just have all players have five years of eligibility so you don't have to play with the Redshirt Rule? I can see this going a couple of different ways.

Intention of the Rule: There's an injury to your starting QB or other position mid way thru the season and you can play the promising True Freshman without losing a year of eligibility to get him reps in an emergency situation.

What will probably happen: Rich Blue Blood flush with four and five star talent will use their coveted five star skill player in high intensity conference, rivalry and bowl games only as a secret weapon and still retain all of his eligibility. I suppose if he's that good he's leaving early anyway, but you know what I mean. 

[NinjaPenguin777]

It'll be nice for those games later in the season when there are injuries or guys aren't performing. Gives the young guys a chance to play. It could also be useful for early on in the season if you have blow out games. Say we're blowing out San Jose State or whoever we play week 2....it could give both Oladukan and Kean time under center in a real game. That's valuable playing time

[Mama_Bull]

I think it would mainly benefit the big name schools who are stacked with top true freshman talent. THOSE players, overall, are much more ready to play, since they are generally bigger, stronger and faster. That's why they achieved their four and five star rating.

The two and three star freshmen, for the most part, need at least a year to develop and improve in some areas. That's why they achieved their rating.

We would not be able to take as much advantage of the new rule, because most of our freshman need that redshirt year.

And, as was mentioned earlier, we can now sell immediate playing time for the handful of guys who are ready to play as true freshmen. IMO, THAT would be undermined greatly if this rule is passed.r

I would be interested in hearing what CCS and other non P5 coaches have to say about this change, since none of them were mentioned in the above article.  

 

 

 

 

[thatboykane]

I think 4 is too much; 2 games would be good, imo.

[charsibb]

Just want to put this out there, but the NCAA - as an organization - exists for 100% of student-athletes, not the 0.001% of athlete-students.