What if it's a freshman who couldn't enroll until the summer and it took them some time to fully grasp the playbook? Kind of like Kosi last year. He wasn't comfortable with the playbook until after halfway through the season. Maybe instead of playing Sherriffs we could've gotten a look at Kosi late in the year when Richt pulled Rosier.
I mean at the end of the day the point I'm making is you don't purposefully hold a guy back from playing until the end of the year when you think he can make an impact or be an improvement is my point. If you think a freshman like Lingard is ready to play day 1, you play them for those first 4 games, then evaluate his performance, and either decide to keep playing him or redshirt him. ....you don't hold Lingard out until with the plan to use him the final 4 weeks. thats the point I was making.
Richt doesn't bring any kids any with the plan to redshirt them. If they can help, he'll play them. Especially a guy like Lingard. I'm just saying I can see the benefit of playing a guy later in the year where he may not have been ready early on mentally or physically.
Just give it time. The day is young.
Actually, that's exactly how the rule reads. Four games to play without losing a season of eligibility at any point of the season. Doesn't have to be at the beginning of the season.
I mean sure. But ppl on here have been saying to literally plan on not playing the freshman until the final 4 weeks...that's just stupid is my point
I don't think he takes a shirt, but I agree. He will see the field early.
Most Collegiate athletes graduate a lot sooner with the special attention received. But it still doesn't take away from the lack of money revenue.
A guy that's good enough to save for your 4 toughest games as a freshman isn't staying 4 years. It's a good rule but it probably won't be as big a factor as some might think. Richt doesn't sit a freshman that can contribute to "save his redshirt" regardless. He's proven that.
