Should redshirting be a thing in regards to development?

[dawgstudent]

I get it if an injury occurs but I would not redshirt a player in the hopes of getting another year out of them in this current environment. Play them.

Thinking of Xavier Gayten who I think has a shot of being really good. He has already played 8 games so no chance for a redshirt but the likelihood of him staying all 4 years is 50/50.

 

[pseudonym]

Agree. There is no reason to redshirt a player to save a year of eligibility for their next school.

Not to mention, generally speaking, players don't want to redshirt. They want to play this year and aren't worried about the season four years from now.

 

[ETK99]

There will always be guys that need to add weight and strength and can't help you if they play. If you have good depth, redshirting makes sense for those guys. But it's going to be less that in the past.

 

[57stratdawg]

I’d put them on the field. Seems likely an extra year gets added anyway.

Add 5th year and reducing the redshirt rule down to 1 or 2 games is the answer to the midseason opt out problem, IMO.

 

[dickiedawg]

I get it if an injury occurs but I would not redshirt a player in the hopes of getting another year out of them in this current environment. Play them.

Thinking of Xavier Gayten who I think has a shot of being really good. He has already played 8 games so no chance for a redshirt but the likelihood of him staying all 4 years is 50/50.

I think you still have to make evaluations on a case by case basis. But if a player can help you win a game now, I’d definitely skew toward playing him because the likelihood of him staying 5 years seems pretty low. Honestly, the odds of either the player or the coaching staff still being there in 5 years is not great at this point. (This is not specifically about Lebby or the current staff)

You can also argue that if he can’t help you win the first year then you shouldn’t sign him in the first place. I’m not sure I’d agree with that entirely- I’d like to think the idea of developing players that can help you in the third year isn’t dead, but I certainly wouldn’t blame someone for making the opposite bet.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

I think you still have to make evaluations on a case by case basis. But if a player can help you win a game now, I’d definitely skew toward playing him because the likelihood of him staying 5 years seems pretty low. Honestly, the odds of either the player or the coaching staff still being there in 5 years is not great at this point. (This is not specifically about Lebby or the current staff)

You can also argue that if he can’t help you win the first year then you shouldn’t sign him in the first place. I’m not sure I’d agree with that entirely- I’d like to think the idea of developing players that can help you in the third year isn’t dead, but I certainly wouldn’t blame someone for making the opposite bet.

Yeah and it also depends on where you are recruiting. Lot of players in MS still need to redshirt, eat correctly, get reps and hit the weight room. But many players from other states are so well-developed and over-coached, so may as well play them immediately if they can help.

 

[shep9332]

Not with the transfer portal. Guys will use it as a 4 game audition for a larger payout somewhere else.

 

[johnson86-1]

I get it if an injury occurs but I would not redshirt a player in the hopes of getting another year out of them in this current environment. Play them.

Thinking of Xavier Gayten who I think has a shot of being really good. He has already played 8 games so no chance for a redshirt but the likelihood of him staying all 4 years is 50/50.

I think you are correct and it's simple. If a guy can help you win, you play them. If you are a have not, you have to view redshirting as in the best case scenario, spending a year of development and scholarship on a player that if you successfully develop them, you are just upping the price of keeping them later on. Not saying there is no place for redshirting but it's going to be harder to justify.

Much better getting a player that is transferring and that can't transfer again without sitting out (although that may be going away soon? Or has it effectively gone away already?) and if you are taking a transfer, why would you take a transfer to redshirt them? You'd have to think they are a really late bloomer, although it has worked out ok for us occasionally getting somebody from JUCO and redshirting them.

 

[mstateglfr]

I would absolutely still redshirt players who have potential, but arent yet ready to contribute. Even if they leave MSU in 2 years- if they arent ready to contribute, why play em?
Players who have a high ceiling but need to add weight/muscle or improve footspeed/game understanding should absolutely redshirt.

 

[aTotal360]

There will always be guys that need to add weight and strength and can't help you if they play. If you have good depth, redshirting makes sense for those guys. But it's going to be less that in the past.

Yeah, but it sucks doing that work for another school.

Redshirts should be only medical at this point.

 

[StateCollege]

It's a case by case basis. In general, there is less value to redshirting players in the current game. But if a player just simply isn't ready, it's better for them and (if he stays) the program to redshirt rather than wasting a year getting like 30 snaps over 5+ games or whatever in garbage time.