You can now play up to four games without burning a redshirt
Comments
-
Ty hates this
-
Can't wait for this bored to get all excited to see Sirmon/Yankoff snaps against North Dakota, only for Haener to play two full quarters.
-
Now every year you can give the backup qb more snaps instead of running the football to run out the clock
-
That's is an underrated part of Pete's success. And Don James in the late 80s/early 90s. When you blow out several PAC 12 teams a year, your freshman get more playing time before it's needed. This will help UW as a result.Pitchfork51 said:Now every year you can give the backup qb more snaps instead of running the football to run out the clock
One part of Sark's failures was he couldn't blow out a PAC 12 team, and throw in the combo that he was relying on freshman to start with no experience. Whereas Pete has many sophomores starting that did get playing time as a freshman. And now will have 2 years of playing time. Especially with how seniors decide to stay around rather than go into the draft. -
Yeah, that was Sark's problem. If only he could have blown out EWU he could have beaten Oregon.2001400ex said:
That's is an underrated part of Pete's success. And Don James in the late 80s/early 90s. When you blow out several PAC 12 teams a year, your freshman get more playing time before it's needed. This will help UW as a result.Pitchfork51 said:Now every year you can give the backup qb more snaps instead of running the football to run out the clock
One part of Sark's failures was he couldn't blow out a PAC 12 team, and throw in the combo that he was relying on freshman to start with no experience. Whereas Pete has many sophomores starting that did get playing time as a freshman. And now will have 2 years of playing time. Especially with how seniors decide to stay around rather than go into the draft. -
Honestly this helps teams like us a lot. We are a team that’s more likely to have 5th year seniors than USC and Bama, etc... so it’s a plus for us in a relative sense.
It’s just generally good for anyone who sometimes is short on players, but gets a lot of 5th year seniors.
We could have preserved the 5th year for:
Ty, Kizer, Tevis, Welly, Miller (although he might have left anyway), McKinney, Taylor and Molden - and we could’ve gotten more from Murphy. -
Youre misunderstanding me2001400ex said:
That's is an underrated part of Pete's success. And Don James in the late 80s/early 90s. When you blow out several PAC 12 teams a year, your freshman get more playing time before it's needed. This will help UW as a result.Pitchfork51 said:Now every year you can give the backup qb more snaps instead of running the football to run out the clock
One part of Sark's failures was he couldn't blow out a PAC 12 team, and throw in the combo that he was relying on freshman to start with no experience. Whereas Pete has many sophomores starting that did get playing time as a freshman. And now will have 2 years of playing time. Especially with how seniors decide to stay around rather than go into the draft. -
This needs to be 5 years of eligibility....everyone can play for 5 years.
Get rid of the redshirt forever. -
I think this is perfect for us, so let’s not change it until we start recruiting better.HuskyJW said:This needs to be 5 years of eligibility....everyone can play for 5 years.
Get rid of the redshirt forever. -
This is really good for us. We’ll have a player or two come up the ranks and ready to play at some point during the year that right now we wouldn’t want to burn the RS. This will also put a carrot out there for RS players that they can still get snaps and contribute.
-
Can't wait to see our true freshman team destroy Oregon St. this year.
-
UW used to play a JV game before home games. My dad would be there to watch it
-
This is a start. I don't like the game thing because one play counts as a game. If they really want to make it for the kids give them 16 quarters. This rule could technically mean a kid gets four plays in a game. That's kind of meaningless.
-
Hire smart coaches and you won't spend time worrying about such thingsMosster47 said:This is a start. I don't like the game thing because one play counts as a game. If they really want to make it for the kids give them 16 quarters. This rule could technically mean a kid gets four plays in a game. That's kind of meaningless.
-
Pointless argument like always. If you break it down by quarters you could get kids on special teams in non blow out games across the season.dnc said:
Hire smart coaches and you won't spend time worrying about such thingsMosster47 said:This is a start. I don't like the game thing because one play counts as a game. If they really want to make it for the kids give them 16 quarters. This rule could technically mean a kid gets four plays in a game. That's kind of meaningless.
In almost every scenario imaginable a kid would get more playing time with 16 quarters compared to just any amount of play in 4 games. Agreed? -
Of course. But why limit it to 16 quarters? At that point just let them play the whole season.Mosster47 said:
Pointless argument like always. If you break it down by quarters you could get kids on special teams in non blow out games across the season.dnc said:
Hire smart coaches and you won't spend time worrying about such thingsMosster47 said:This is a start. I don't like the game thing because one play counts as a game. If they really want to make it for the kids give them 16 quarters. This rule could technically mean a kid gets four plays in a game. That's kind of meaningless.
In almost every scenario imaginable a kid would get more playing time with 16 quarters compared to just any amount of play in 4 games. Agreed?
IDGAF either way, I just know hypothesizing a kid only gets 4 plays out of this is a complete waste of time. That's never going to actually happen. -
Do you coach at the highest level in a football state?dnc said:
Of course. But why limit it to 16 quarters? At that point just let them play the whole season.Mosster47 said:
Pointless argument like always. If you break it down by quarters you could get kids on special teams in non blow out games across the season.dnc said:
Hire smart coaches and you won't spend time worrying about such thingsMosster47 said:This is a start. I don't like the game thing because one play counts as a game. If they really want to make it for the kids give them 16 quarters. This rule could technically mean a kid gets four plays in a game. That's kind of meaningless.
In almost every scenario imaginable a kid would get more playing time with 16 quarters compared to just any amount of play in 4 games. Agreed?
IDGAF either way, I just know hypothesizing a kid only gets 4 plays out of this is a complete waste of time. That's never going to actually happen. -
Just say you lost and move on. 4 games = 16 quarters.dnc said:
Of course. But why limit it to 16 quarters? At that point just let them play the whole season.Mosster47 said:
Pointless argument like always. If you break it down by quarters you could get kids on special teams in non blow out games across the season.dnc said:
Hire smart coaches and you won't spend time worrying about such thingsMosster47 said:This is a start. I don't like the game thing because one play counts as a game. If they really want to make it for the kids give them 16 quarters. This rule could technically mean a kid gets four plays in a game. That's kind of meaningless.
In almost every scenario imaginable a kid would get more playing time with 16 quarters compared to just any amount of play in 4 games. Agreed?
IDGAF either way, I just know hypothesizing a kid only gets 4 plays out of this is a complete waste of time. That's never going to actually happen. -
16 quarters = 240 minutes. Each freshman should be allowed to play 240 minutes without burning their redshirt. Otherwise a kid could technically only get 16 plays in if you limit it to quarters. That's kind of meaningless.Mosster47 said:
Just say you lost and move on. 4 games = 16 quarters.dnc said:
Of course. But why limit it to 16 quarters? At that point just let them play the whole season.Mosster47 said:
Pointless argument like always. If you break it down by quarters you could get kids on special teams in non blow out games across the season.dnc said:
Hire smart coaches and you won't spend time worrying about such thingsMosster47 said:This is a start. I don't like the game thing because one play counts as a game. If they really want to make it for the kids give them 16 quarters. This rule could technically mean a kid gets four plays in a game. That's kind of meaningless.
In almost every scenario imaginable a kid would get more playing time with 16 quarters compared to just any amount of play in 4 games. Agreed?
IDGAF either way, I just know hypothesizing a kid only gets 4 plays out of this is a complete waste of time. That's never going to actually happen. -
*14,400 seconddnc said:
16 quarters = 240 minutes. Each freshman should be allowed to play 240 minutes without burning their redshirt. Otherwise a kid could technically only get 16 plays in if you limit it to quarters. That's kind of meaningless.Mosster47 said:
Just say you lost and move on. 4 games = 16 quarters.dnc said:
Of course. But why limit it to 16 quarters? At that point just let them play the whole season.Mosster47 said:
Pointless argument like always. If you break it down by quarters you could get kids on special teams in non blow out games across the season.dnc said:
Hire smart coaches and you won't spend time worrying about such thingsMosster47 said:This is a start. I don't like the game thing because one play counts as a game. If they really want to make it for the kids give them 16 quarters. This rule could technically mean a kid gets four plays in a game. That's kind of meaningless.
In almost every scenario imaginable a kid would get more playing time with 16 quarters compared to just any amount of play in 4 games. Agreed?
IDGAF either way, I just know hypothesizing a kid only gets 4 plays out of this is a complete waste of time. That's never going to actually happen. -
Personally I'm hoping this isn't wasted on the North Dakota's of the schedule. I see it more as a plug in play for injuries as the year goes on until the starter is healthy.
It also works well for players who took the first half of the season to understand the playbook but then starts to move up the depth chart as they start showing out in practice. You can wait to use them until the end of the year when they understand what they're doing and can be solid reinforcements for games that matter. -
Emptying the freshman bench in the third quarter against Cuog will always be specialDoogCourics said:Personally I'm hoping this isn't wasted on the North Dakota's of the schedule. I see it more as a plug in play for injuries as the year goes on until the starter is healthy.
It also works well for players who took the first half of the season to understand the playbook but then starts to move up the depth chart as they start showing out in practice. You can wait to use them until the end of the year when they understand what they're doing and can be solid reinforcements for games that matter.
