FB: Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association

[ADAWGISADAWG4LIFE]

Isnt there some contingency that a player can play in 30% of games and still redshirt or am I confusing that with a medical hardship?

[Uncle Rico]

Here's an interesting question/dilemma for everyone to comment on in regards to your opinions on this.  I realize this is a DI issue, however, it still is intriguing.  One of Alabama's star receivers is now out indefinitely with a fractured leg sustained in this past weekend's game against Auburn (he had surgery today it was reported and it is unclear whether he will be able to return for whatever bowl game Alabama ends up going to).  So with him out, Alabama is down to 4 or 5 receivers and it is reported that Saban is considering using their top freshman receiver prospect, who was to be redshirted this year.  He has been practicing this fall and getting a lot of reps the past 3 weeks apparently.

So the question is...if you were that player, would you sacrifice basically an entire year that you were to be red-shirted to play in two final games of the season and then only have 3 years left?  I think that most of us would answer they probably would if the head coach asked them to, however, that would still be a very difficult decision to make.  You would really be sacrificing for the good of the team, but giving up much.  I think at this point, however, that certainly a head coach could also not be faulted for not playing him and saving his red-shirt season.  If Alabama plays in the National Championship game, I'd bet that Saban would persuade the kid to play, obviously because of the high stakes.  On the other hand, if it is another bowl game and not the title game, then I would think not wasting the red-shirt year would be the better choice i.e. the better part of valor.  But...who knows with Saban!

Anyway, it is an interesting dilemma and I am interested to hear your thoughts/comments/opinions on the same.  What would you do if you were the Head Coach and what would you do if you were the player?

Wow, that is tough.  If the player is red-shirted, are they still receiving scholarship $ for school? If so, they sort of are getting paid to play even if they are red-shirted.

If I were the coach, I might indeed ask the player if they would be willing to suit up for the big time.  National Championship implications!  If I were the player, I would jump at that and not even wait for the coach to ask.  There is no guarantee that they will be in the same situation ever again (although being on a team like Alabama you might expect it).  Also, injuries could happen that might prevent you from ever reaching that opportunity again.  Also, the coach would certainly appreciate that dedication to the team. 

[ExTartanPlayer]

Here's an interesting question/dilemma for everyone to comment on in regards to your opinions on this.  I realize this is a DI issue, however, it still is intriguing.  One of Alabama's star receivers is now out indefinitely with a fractured leg sustained in this past weekend's game against Auburn (he had surgery today it was reported and it is unclear whether he will be able to return for whatever bowl game Alabama ends up going to).  So with him out, Alabama is down to 4 or 5 receivers and it is reported that Saban is considering using their top freshman receiver prospect, who was to be redshirted this year.  He has been practicing this fall and getting a lot of reps the past 3 weeks apparently.

So the question is...if you were that player, would you sacrifice basically an entire year that you were to be red-shirted to play in two final games of the season and then only have 3 years left?  I think that most of us would answer they probably would if the head coach asked them to, however, that would still be a very difficult decision to make.  You would really be sacrificing for the good of the team, but giving up much.  I think at this point, however, that certainly a head coach could also not be faulted for not playing him and saving his red-shirt season.  If Alabama plays in the National Championship game, I'd bet that Saban would persuade the kid to play, obviously because of the high stakes.  On the other hand, if it is another bowl game and not the title game, then I would think not wasting the red-shirt year would be the better choice i.e. the better part of valor.  But...who knows with Saban!

Anyway, it is an interesting dilemma and I am interested to hear your thoughts/comments/opinions on the same.  What would you do if you were the Head Coach and what would you do if you were the player?

Interesting dilemma, but if necessary I'd burn the redshirt. If he is one of Bama's top prospects, presumably, he hopes to play in the NFL one day, and many top prospects leave school before their senior year or fifth year.

[formerd3db]

Good comments from everyone.  Indeed, it is an interesting dilemma.  Obviously, it comes down between the coach and the player.  With not playing all season until the end (and only practicing intently i.e. getting serious reps only in the last 3 weeks), even if a budding superstar, it would be taking a chance because there is no guarantee that player would be the "saving grace" for the team.  On the other hand, remember Tony Dorsett from Pitt - he didn't even play in the first 3 games of his freshman year, but due to injuries to the 5 running backs ahead of him on the depth chart, he started the remaining games and went on to rush for over 1,000 yards that season and..."you know the rest of the story".

As to DAWG's question, that % has to be in the first part of the season.  Beyond that time, if you play, it counts as a full season of eligibility and, also, in that regard, you can't break up the season and only use parts of it, including for a medical redshirt.

Thanks for your opinions/comments.  It will be interesting to see what happens.  As to my own opinion, again, I think that unless Alabama does end up playing for the national championship and only going to one of the lesser bowls, I would not burn the redshirt year.

[formerd3db]

So I guess that no one here on our board (including myself) has much, if anything, to say about the remaining DIII (or even DII or FCS) playoff games?   It has been quiet here.

Nonetheless, in watching the Louisville/Rutgers game on ESPN last evening, while Louisville is obviously a good team this year (they won a share with Rutgers of the Big East title with the win last night), Rutgers sure blew that game.  They had multiple chances that would have won the game (dropped passes and runs fot TD's, turnovers, etc.).  They did have a huge crowd at Rutger's stadium (second largest ever at over 52,000), so that is perhaps a good sign for the Big Ten as they come in to the league in leaving the Big East.  Louisville, of course, announced this week that they are also leaving the Big East for the ACC.  This conference alignment is crazy, but, once again, understandable because of it "being all about the $".

Personally, I would have liked to see the Big Ten bring in Missouri and Pittsburgh and perhaps even Cincinnati, although it is my understanding that Illinois blocked Missouri coming in and Ohio State was reluctant for the other two schools.  Yet, not sure those made any sense (I know why they were opposed i.e. due to the closer proximity of the market share for fans, recruiting - those two aspects mainly as that is what they said, but even the TV/media aspects also) because we have Michigan/Michigan State here in our state and that has not been a major issue.

Anyway, as some of the sports pundits have been saying, I tend to agree that we will probably eventually see that these super-conferences will form the framework of the later revised DI playoff system such as eventually going to at least an 8 team playoff (from their initial planned 4 team playoff) similar to what DIII and DII did at the beginning and that also being the end of the conference championship games that everyone is having now.  The latter of which IMO is ridiculous.  It will be interesting to see what happens.  $ drives everything anymore today as we all know.

[NCF]

So I guess that no one here on our board (including myself) has much, if anything, to say about the remaining DIII (or even DII or FCS) playoff games?   It has been quiet here.

Nonetheless, in watching the Louisville/Rutgers game on ESPN last evening, while Louisville is obviously a good team this year (they won a share with Rutgers of the Big East title with the win last night), Rutgers sure blew that game.  They had multiple chances that would have won the game (dropped passes and runs fot TD's, turnovers, etc.).  They did have a huge crowd at Rutger's stadium (second largest ever at over 52,000), so that is perhaps a good sign for the Big Ten as they come in to the league in leaving the Big East.  Louisville, of course, announced this week that they are also leaving the Big East for the ACC.  This conference alignment is crazy, but, once again, understandable because of it "being all about the $".

Personally, I would have liked to see the Big Ten bring in Missouri and Pittsburgh and perhaps even Cincinnati, although it is my understanding that Illinois blocked Missouri coming in and Ohio State was reluctant for the other two schools.  Yet, not sure those made any sense (I know why they were opposed i.e. due to the closer proximity of the market share for fans, recruiting - those two aspects mainly as that is what they said, but even the TV/media aspects also) because we have Michigan/Michigan State here in our state and that has not been a major issue.

Anyway, as some of the sports pundits have been saying, I tend to agree that we will probably eventually see that these super-conferences will form the framework of the later revised DI playoff system such as eventually going to at least an 8 team playoff (from their initial planned 4 team playoff) similar to what DIII and DII did at the beginning and that also being the end of the conference championship games that everyone is having now.  The latter of which IMO is ridiculous.  It will be interesting to see what happens.  $ drives everything anymore today as we all know.

It's been quiet on the CCIW board (well, even more than usual) now that both of our teams are out. I agree, $$$ drives everything in D1 football. Will be interesting to see how the D1 play-off system operates, as it expands, and what happens to some of the bowl games. What I  really want to know is will  ;Dthe Big Ten will change it's name, and to what

[formerd3db]

So I guess that no one here on our board (including myself) has much, if anything, to say about the remaining DIII (or even DII or FCS) playoff games?   It has been quiet here.

Nonetheless, in watching the Louisville/Rutgers game on ESPN last evening, while Louisville is obviously a good team this year (they won a share with Rutgers of the Big East title with the win last night), Rutgers sure blew that game.  They had multiple chances that would have won the game (dropped passes and runs fot TD's, turnovers, etc.).  They did have a huge crowd at Rutger's stadium (second largest ever at over 52,000), so that is perhaps a good sign for the Big Ten as they come in to the league in leaving the Big East.  Louisville, of course, announced this week that they are also leaving the Big East for the ACC.  This conference alignment is crazy, but, once again, understandable because of it "being all about the $".

Personally, I would have liked to see the Big Ten bring in Missouri and Pittsburgh and perhaps even Cincinnati, although it is my understanding that Illinois blocked Missouri coming in and Ohio State was reluctant for the other two schools.  Yet, not sure those made any sense (I know why they were opposed i.e. due to the closer proximity of the market share for fans, recruiting - those two aspects mainly as that is what they said, but even the TV/media aspects also) because we have Michigan/Michigan State here in our state and that has not been a major issue.

Anyway, as some of the sports pundits have been saying, I tend to agree that we will probably eventually see that these super-conferences will form the framework of the later revised DI playoff system such as eventually going to at least an 8 team playoff (from their initial planned 4 team playoff) similar to what DIII and DII did at the beginning and that also being the end of the conference championship games that everyone is having now.  The latter of which IMO is ridiculous.  It will be interesting to see what happens.  $ drives everything anymore today as we all know.

It's been quiet on the CCIW board (well, even more than usual) now that both of our teams are out. I agree, $$$ drives everything in D1 football. Will be interesting to see how the D1 play-off system operates, as it expands, and what happens to some of the bowl games. What I  really want to know is will  ;Dthe Big Ten will change it's name, and to what

newcard:

Yes, my friend, it will be interesting to see if they change the name.  I realize for the sake of tradition and history, they have kept the "Big Ten" name.  However, I think that is now somewhat ridiculous with additional teams, just as it is in the other major conferences (Pac-12, Big 12, etc.) and IMO, the names should be changed accordingly.  Whether all these conferences will do that remains to be seen, although I kind of think they won't do it, yet who knows?  These crazy changes are happening almost daily now.

Also, in that regard, IMO, it is kind of ridiculous to have west coast teams in the Big East and/or vice versa east coast teams in mid-west or farther - kind of joke and...think of the travel costs involved.  I thought every one wanted to try and keep those controlled, yet with all the $ being thrown around and the media coverage/providing of $, I guess it is kind of a "free for all".  Kind of like our government i.e. the WH is doing.   Oops!  I'm not supposed to bring in "real" politics here, but at the same time, it is really politics with regards to the college football world.

BTW, I can certainly understand where you are at this time i.e. your football withdrawl as you posted on the other board.  Although the DIII, DII and FCS playoffs are still going and the DI bowl season nearing (even with a few DI games left this weekend and the FCS title game not even being until the first week of January), I am already starting to feel the effects of that too!

[sac]

The Big Ten Network is the Big Ten's brand now, the name will not change.

Same conference that despite complete and utter contempt for the names of their divisions from the public stuck with them.

[DBQ1965]

The Big Ten Network is the Big Ten's brand now, the name will not change.

Same conference that despite complete and utter contempt for the names of their divisions from the public stuck with them.

What if they went back to their original name as the "Western Conference"?  That makes about as much sense!

[NCF]

The Big Ten Network is the Big Ten's brand now, the name will not change.

Same conference that despite complete and utter contempt for the names of their divisions from the public stuck with them.

What if they went back to their original name as the "Western Conference"?  That makes about as much sense!

Or have 2 divisions of 10 teams each and they can be the B1G2

[ExTartanPlayer]

Just moaning some more, but I'll add that it's ridiculous that the Big Ten has 14 teams, the Big 12 has ten teams, and they won't change the names.  Even with the "branding" and whatnot.  Ridiculous.

[ADAWGISADAWG4LIFE]

I cant see the Big Ten changing their name, its too well established. The Big 12 should just go away, would make sense to have a split between PAC and SEC as many schools are either western or gulf coast which creates a nice split. I dont know how any of the other Big 12 schools can stomach staying there, with the amount of deference that Texas is treated with, which was a direct reason for A & M bolting, but judging how well they did Texas and the Big 12 probably appreciate that. I would say if nothing else Big 12 should change its name as a conference its only been around since 1996(I think) and there isnt much tradition to it. The Big Ten is a big brand, as alluded to with the Big Ten Network and they have resisted a change as far back as the addition of their 11th member. Its been some time since they have truly been the Big Ten as noted by their former logo which incorporated the 11 into it, which I always thought was neat.

[ADAWGISADAWG4LIFE]

As I peruse Twitter this evening the rumor popping up now is that UVA and Georgia Tech will announce on Monday they are leaving the ACC. Will join the Big Ten. Ga Tech makes sense as it gets Big Ten into Atlanta TV market. ACC would be crippled after that, have to imagine FSU would try to jump ship next, SEC? Big 12?

[sac]

As I peruse Twitter this evening the rumor popping up now is that UVA and Georgia Tech will announce on Monday they are leaving the ACC. Will join the Big Ten. Ga Tech makes sense as it gets Big Ten into Atlanta TV market. ACC would be crippled after that, have to imagine FSU would try to jump ship next, SEC? Big 12?

SEC likely won't accept Florida State.....they have standards   FSU to Big 12

Argh, that is all.

[formerd3db]

ExTartan, DAWG and sac:

Good comments and I agree with you all.

BTW, two great DI games last evening for conference championships.  The MAC Championship game at Ford Field in Detroit with Kent State/Northern Illinois, both nationally ranked #17 and #21 respectively going into that game, with a BCS bowl bid on the line.  Both teams are very good and have come a long way, especially Kent State.  But NIU won their second straight MAC title in double OT in a whirlwind game- it was really good with tons of scoring back and forth in the 4th quarter.  Either team could have won that game and actually Kent State had their chances about 3-4 times to win the game in regulation, but faltered in the red zone in all of those up until the late 4th quarter.  I was impressed with each teams FG kickers - fantastic (NIU's guy won the MAC title game with his kick last year and again tying the game last night in the first OT).

The other game was the PAC-12 Championship with Stanford and UCLA.  Another great game with each team having its chances to win, but especially UCLA squandering their chances.  They could have beat Stanford, but the latter showed just how good a team they are also and they held out, to grab the Rose Bowl bid.  So whoever from the Big Ten playes them i.e. the winner of the Nebraska/Wisconsin game, will have a tough time IMO.  But...on a somewhat unimportant sidelight, it will be an "all Red and white" Rose Bowl as far as team colors, unless Stanford wears their black uniforms and black helmets like they did last evening.  I also liked UCLA's other uniforms they wore last weekend which had a navy blue helmet and gold UCLA script logo and Navy blue jersey's and pants, although they wore their usual conventional uniform for the Stanford game last evening.  Must be nice to have all that $ from the Nike and/or Adidas companies to have several different helmets and uniforms - too bad we couldn't have that in DIII.

Anyway, should be some interesting games today at all the divisions and, of course, in our DIII playoffs.  I think most people are pretty much in the same opinion as to the 4 teams who will get to the semis in DIII after today's games are done.