Redshirting

[VaSaltine]

With the new coaching staff, can we now please get rid of the confusing classification of redshirts? We seem to be the only school that calls our true freshmen who sit out the year a true sophomore the next year, instead of a redshirt freshman. Following it up the classes, our fifth year seniors are the only ones who were called redshirt seniors. I understand the thought that a player needs to earn his fifth year in the eyes of the prior coaching staff, but it creates a lot of confusion as to the actual number of years of eligibility a player has.
One can hope.

 

[SmilinBob]

That would make it easier for us and along those lines I wonder what their theories are on redshirting freshmen.

 

[PhatOrange]

The way Marrone did it was stupid.

 

[billsin01]

Yeah, ND has done it like this for years, I guess b/c you technically have to "earn" a fifth year, but it makes it impossible for a fan to follow. I literally can't remember four items on a grocery list -- trying to remember participation reports from four years ago is absolutely out of the question.

 

[OrangeCrush22]

Am I the only one who doesn't think this is a big deal?

 

[Crusty]

Am I the only one who doesn't think this is a big deal?

Which is why they should do it.

 

[Frozen]

Am I the only one who doesn't think this is a big deal?

It's not a very big deal. It's just confusing. I remember in the 2011 season, some game broadcasts listed Nassib as a senior, which led to announcers saying things like, "Syracuse will have a new QB starting next season," which was false.

 

[BlazeOrange]

Aside from confusion amoung us fans, the people writing preview articles often just look at the listed seniors and assume they will all be gone, leading to a discussion of all the "holes" we have to fill even though starters will be returning. At best, we waste our time reading inaccurate stories about the amount of rebuilding we'll need to do. At worst, it can also affect our initial rankings if voters just skim over those previews (especially ones that place us lower in the conference than should actually be warranted).

Although I kinda agree with the "earn your 5th year" philosophy, it isn't worth the hassle to list everyone that way. They could just make that point internally with the players and still describe them publically the way most everyone else does.

 

[SmilinBob]

Didn't ND start to the redshirting process a lot later than the rest of college football?

 

[Frozen]

Aside from confusion amoung us fans, the people writing preview articles often just look at the listed seniors and assume they will all be gone, leading to a discussion of all the "holes" we have to fill even though starters will be returning. At best, we waste our time reading inaccurate stories about the amount of rebuilding we'll need to do. At worst, it can also affect our initial rankings if voters just skim over those previews (especially ones that place us lower in the conference than should actually be warranted).

Although I kinda agree with the "earn your 5th year" philosophy, it isn't worth the hassle to list everyone that way. They could just make that point internally with the players and still describe them publically the way most everyone else does.

I haven't played the NCAA Football video game in a while, but I believe Marrone's roster ended up costing SU's players a year of eligibility in the game. Juniors in terms of eligibility were listed as seniors, etc.

 

[BlazeOrange]

It's not a very big deal. It's just confusing. I remember in the 2011 season, some game broadcasts listed Nassib as a senior, which led to announcers saying things like, "Syracuse will have a new QB starting next season," which was false.

Just took a look at the roster at SU athletics and IGL Charlie Loeb is listed as a senior, meaning he'll be ignored by many when evaluating next year's passing game. The only other one that jumped out at me as a likely returning player is Andrew Philips.

Btw, although the website updated the staff on the "Coaching Staff" link, all of the old assistants are still listed on the "Team Roster" page. That would be fine if they were listing the staff for the 2012-2013 season per the title of the spread sheet. However, The Shafe shows up as Head Coach instead of that other guy.

 

[steve deberg]

I haven't played the NCAA Football video game in a while, but I believe Marrone's roster ended up costing SU's players a year of eligibility in the game. Juniors in terms of eligibility were listed as seniors, etc.

The Syracuse Franken-roster has always been botch city. The disparity in effort put into different team's rosters makes the star system look completely objective.

 

[Chip]

It's not a very big deal. It's just confusing. I remember in the 2011 season, some game broadcasts listed Nassib as a senior, which led to announcers saying things like, "Syracuse will have a new QB starting next season," which was false.

It made Senior Day more of a mystery. See if they're announced, if not they'll be back. Hard to keep track, but really not the end of the world.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

Are you trying to put me out of business?

 

[Moontan]

It's not a very big deal. It's just confusing. I remember in the 2011 season, some game broadcasts listed Nassib as a senior, which led to announcers saying things like, "Syracuse will have a new QB starting next season," which was false.

Technically, they were right, as Syracuse went from a QB named "Nahseeb" to one name "Nassib".

I have no problem with the way things have been. I also don't care what HCSS chooses to do. It's not that big a deal. If it confuses the great unwashed (including opposing coaches) and makes OrangeExtreme a handy resource, what's the harm?

* I'm also a fan of awarding 4-year scholarships instead of year-to-year scholarships. Short of legal or NCAA issues, a student-athlete should be guaranteed a shot at getting a degree. I realize this is not a major issue at Syracuse, but it's something that the NCAA or Big-5 should support.