It was really both parties deciding what’s best, which is the point of the rule change. If the coach is completely dictating whether a kid redshirts, then he’s going to have a lot of transfers, which won’t get him anywhere.
Whether we could have put a “better” team on the field is debatable, given our early-season performance. Whatever. It’s a stupid debate, imo. The players and coaches tried to win every game, and they had to balance multiple interests in doing so. Happens every game every year. Whether it pays long-term dividends remains to be seen.
I’ve said a couple of times in this thread that tanking may not be the right word. That said, what you’re saying above is something in that direction. I agree that Dana was being strategic but he wasn’t doing everything he could to win games last year.
Most people and he wasn’t the only player to redshirt.
Most? Who are they? In the games he played he couldn’t hit the broad side of a barn if it was farther than 30 feet. Tune was better until the hammy strain.
Not exactly the definition of tanking. CDH is focused on long term, not short term goals. I suggest being a good manager of anything means short term goals take a back seat to long term unless one is desperate for immediate success.
One HUGE difference between the NFL and MLB comparisons is sitting players in the pros does not impact their ability to play the next season. Whether you sit or play your star RB, he can come back next year and however many more years he can stay in the league. The individual player is not negatively affected.
OTOH playing a college player does impact how long they can play and develop.
Look at UConn. The announcers said they generally have a younger team because they always play their best players and don’t redshirt many. Obviously that negatively impacts the team performance, but it also impacts their players reaching their full potential.
Ask yourself, do you think King will reach more of his potential by sitting last year and playing this year or continuing to play last year? Wins and losses are very important, but isn’t student athlete development important too, on and off the field?
Your last paragraph. I absolutely agree. But I also believe we’re a bowl team last year had King, Car, Corbin played all last season. 7-5-ish team. This year, if King is back, I think we are favorites to win the conference. Good for the team, good for King. But you make great points.
King has never had continuity in his career. It has always been different. He deserves to take the opportunity to sit out and take the season to observe and learn.
Depends on what happens during spring ball. There are no guarantees of anyone being the starter at this point. For all we know CDH has someone in mind we haven’t heard about.
I would say no one knows who the starter will be at this point
Yeah, maybe CDH thinks we’re gonna get a grad transfer starting QB from somewhere like Ohio State or Alabama or Texas or Florida or another program like that, right?
Right? I dont know if that is right or not but it is a possibility whether a remote one or not. I have no idea what CDH is thinking. Those are just some of the possibilities.
A few on here think they have it nailed as to our future and are more than willing to let one know of their “theories”. They profess to be DK mind readers among other abilities. They believe they know what CDH is going to do next as well. Perhaps they should get a position on the coaching staff and use their predictions to help us go 12-0.
I have always been frustrated by the lack of strategic
planning by coaches. A frequent scenario is:
Senior QB gets all of the snaps in games
The next QB is suddenly the starter in the following season
The team has a mediocre season and many blame the QB
It’s understandable why this is done. The coach feels pressure
to win now but without a good red-shirting program that is not
likely on anything approaching a consistent basis.
Amy coach that does not utilize strategic planning is sacrificing
the program for an opportunity to win now.
A team should be playing 22-23 year old players not 17-18.
Dana did right. Hope he continues.
I agree. If King returns, Dana cut the rebuilding process to 1 year. Instead of 2 or 3. It was the right move. And until the NCAA does something about it, it was well within the rules.
He was a top 15 candidate last year. The difference this year is Vegas is enticing some fans of a power school to lay some money down early hoping he’ll transfer there