AFCA proposes redshirt rule change

[ellitor 33,086]

This could be big for some players if it passes

#AFCA proposes a new eligibility model, still 5 years to play 4, but if athlete plays less than 4 games in a season can be redshirted. pic.twitter.com/AaTufUvHDp

— AFCA (@WeAreAFCA) January 11, 2017

[keesler 5,924]

I think this would be great for development.  Once a new player hits the roster, the coaches can start developing them and would be able to give them a test in live game action any time during the season and then evaluation their development progress.  The option play 4 games and still be able to red-shirt afterwards would be great.

[AUEngineer2016 407]

Since the stipulation is just "less than 4 games", could a player potentially become a starter for the last 3 games of the season (due to injury, a la Ole Miss QB Shea Patterson after Chad Kelly went down) and still take a redshirt? Would this rule change be retroactive (i.e. could Shea still apply for a redshirt)?

[ellitor 33,086]

7 minutes ago, AUEngineer2016 said:

Since the stipulation is just "less than 4 games", could a player potentially become a starter for the last 3 games of the season (due to injury, a la Ole Miss QB Shea Patterson after Chad Kelly went down) and still take a redshirt? Would this rule change be retroactive (i.e. could Shea still apply for a redshirt)?

If this article is correct then yes to 1st question. No to 2nd question as all AFCA proposals do not go into effect til they are voted on & approved by university presidents each April and they have never done retroactive at that point.

Quote

Such a change would allow true freshmen to get snaps during the season, in bowls or non-conference games for instance, without losing a year of eligibility.

 

[lionheartkc 6,150]

5 minutes ago, ellitor said:

Such a change would allow true freshmen to get snaps during the season, in bowls or non-conference games for instance, without losing a year of eligibility.

The next question would be, would that open things up so an early enrollee could play in a bowl... say Stidham coming in for Sean when he broke his arm.

[ellitor 33,086]

7 minutes ago, lionheartkc said:

The next question would be, would that open things up so an early enrollee could play in a bowl... say Stidham coming in for Sean when he broke his arm.

I doubt it since mid year terms start after all the bowls are over. Stidham for example became eligible today when classes started back for AU. He just does not have any games to play in til September.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

3 minutes ago, ellitor said:

I doubt it since mid year terms start after all the bowls are over. Stidham for example became eligible today when classes started back for AU. He just does not have any games to play in til September.

Oh well... it's too late anyway.

[JMassie11 1,610]

I really like the non conference part.....would allow guys to get their feet wet in blow out games

[Tiger 8,819]

Could be a solid way to see a QB, or anyone, in live action before deciding if they need another year of development before getting on the field.

 

Lol would've been nice to redshirt JJ last year after LSU game to hopefully teach him how to read defenses...although might not have made a difference in his particular case but in theory you get to see what you have without blowing a year of eligibility for a guy. Could be kind of useful for a coach like Gus who seemingly doesn't know what a guy can do until a month into the regular season. 

 

Also, very intriguing to have the ability to pull a guy out for our last few games as an added boost and still not lose eligibility - if I understood that correctly.

[gr82b4au 5,568]

I think everyone is going to like this.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

Just now, gr82b4au said:

I think everyone is going to like this.

Except for the DCs who are the 8th game in the schedule and suddenly find themselves facing the Freshman phenom QB that they have no film on, who's been getting ready in the wings all season.

[ellitor 33,086]

1 minute ago, lionheartkc said:

Except for the DCs who are the 8th game in the schedule and suddenly find themselves facing the Freshman phenom QB that they have no film on, who's been getting ready in the wings all season.

If he is a phenom they will at least have high school film to look at.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

1 minute ago, ellitor said:

If he is a phenom they will at least have high school film to look at.

True, but if they haven't played until that game, they wouldn't even know to look at it (unless they are watching Hudl highlights in the booth while their offense is on the field).

[ellitor 33,086]

2 minutes ago, lionheartkc said:

True, but if they haven't played until that game, they wouldn't even know to look at it (unless they are watching Hudl highlights in the booth while their offense is on the field).

Ahh. You're talking about a surprise after the game started. Still a phenom will be well known & already looked at by most schools.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

4 minutes ago, ellitor said:

Ahh. You're talking about a surprise after the game started. Still a phenom will be well known & already looked at by most schools.

Yea, I get you... still it does have the potential to add some serious wrinkles to the last 4 games of the season as coaches could effectively roll out all of their freshman who hadn't played the rest of the year.... and honestly would be dumb not to, or at least get them on the field against every cupcake, as any experience is good experience.

[looney 794]

*Fewer* than 4 games.

 

[lionheartkc 6,150]

Just now, bryanlooney said:

*Fewer* than 4 games.

 

Good catch... get them in against every cupcake or at least the last 3 games.

[looney 794]

Just now, lionheartkc said:

Good catch... get them in against every cupcake or at least the last 3 games.

Sorry - that was actually meant as a response to the original tweet from the AFCA that said "less than 4 games". Just a grammar thing. Not a particulars-of-the-rule thing and not directed at you or anyone else. However, the wording is curious, now that you mention it.