Our Great (*big) Dane ...

[Dann]

some of u guys are way to hooked on red shirts for frosh. p clearly feels that the players he is bringing in are capable of full development within 4 years and not 5. a bit different from past ways with this team. so lets see what happens with this strategy.

 

[businesslawyer]

some of u guys are way to hooked on red shirts for frosh. p clearly feels that the players he is bringing in are capable of full development within 4 years and not 5. a bit different from past ways with this team. so lets see what happens with this strategy.

What is full development? You don't think players get better on Sundays as they continue to learn and develop?

 

[Dann]

What is full development? You don't think players get better on Sundays as they continue to learn and develop?

yea thats it. once a kid goes to the nfl he can never ever ever get any better. its against the law.

 

[pj]

If he's good enough to help the team as a freshman, he should play. If he's that good he shouldn't need 5 years to prepare for the NFL. If he's helped the team for 3-4 years before leaving, there will be time to recruit a replacement who's equally good.

 

[businesslawyer]

yea thats it. once a kid goes to the nfl he can never ever ever get any better. its against the law.

So then, what do you mean by "full development." Almost 100% of players would be better in year 5 than in year 4, and certainly than they would be in year 1.

 

[Dann]

So then, what do you mean by "full development." Almost 100% of players would be better in year 5 than in year 4, and certainly than they would be in year 1.

what i ment i guess is that p thinks what is possible development wise in college for his kids can be achieved in 4 years in some cases. i think he feels the rs is a wasted year in the grand look of it. its 1 less year the player gets to cash a nfl check and he feels he has kids who in 4 years can develope enough to make the nfl. 4 years vs 5 will also lead to more turnover in a 2nd round of this in 3 or 4 years for all of u that want him gone already.

 

[FAIRTIDES]

what i ment i guess is that p thinks what is possible development wise in college for his kids can be achieved in 4 years in some cases. i think he feels the rs is a wasted year in the grand look of it. its 1 less year the player gets to cash a nfl check and he feels he has kids who in 4 years can develope enough to make the nfl. 4 years vs 5 will also lead to more turnover in a 2nd round of this in 3 or 4 years for all of u that want him gone already.

In the case of the offensive line, I think PP and the OC think developing depth is, at this point, more important than the 5th year. There were a number of articles noting that the OC's number-one priority was OL depth. How many times did we read that he was "holding his breath" hoping that one of the OL's didn't get hurt.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

some of u guys are way to hooked on red shirts for frosh. p clearly feels that the players he is bringing in are capable of full development within 4 years and not 5. a bit different from past ways with this team. so lets see what happens with this strategy.

I'm all for playing true frosh if they can contribute. But Samra has only played a few series against UMass. Assuming the OL stays healthy or he doesn't take another snap this year.....you don't think that's a wasted year of eligibility? I don't mind burning RS's for special teams, but Samra this year and Abrams/Foxx last year bother me.

 

[whaler11]

what i ment i guess is that p thinks what is possible development wise in college for his kids can be achieved in 4 years in some cases. i think he feels the rs is a wasted year in the grand look of it. its 1 less year the player gets to cash a nfl check and he feels he has kids who in 4 years can develope enough to make the nfl. 4 years vs 5 will also lead to more turnover in a 2nd round of this in 3 or 4 years for all of u that want him gone already.

Obviously he doesn't think this but if P thought redshirt years are wasted years, but playing special teams and never cracking the two deep isn't then he'd be the stupidest person who ever walked the earth. Thankfully he doesn't believe that.

 

[Srqhusky]

I am glad we have people on the boneyard that know more than a coach with four big east championships

 

[Palatine]

I am glad we have people on the boneyard that know more than a coach with four big east championships

I missed where P. stands for perfect and he never made a personnel mistake in his career. The theory of the infallible coach once again rears its ugly head.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

I missed where P. stands for perfect and he never made a personnel mistake in his career. The theory of the infallible coach once again rears its ugly head.

Agree with Palatine here. I don't know how we would've fared last year if we didn't burn Foxx and Abrams redshirts in garbage time. It would've been ugly.

 

[businesslawyer]

I missed where P. stands for perfect and he never made a personnel mistake in his career. The theory of the infallible coach once again rears its ugly head.

Red herring defense of a position. No one thinks any coach is perfect. But the mere fact that they are capable of mistakes is not an argument that they've made one in a particular instance. To have an argument, it has to be based on more than that.

 

[Srqhusky]

I missed where P. stands for perfect and he never made a personnel mistake in his career. The theory of the infallible coach once again rears its ugly head.

not sure where I said he was perfect we all make mistakes but doesn't a successful record and consistency tell he might just know what he is doing.

If you were in the office of a plastic surgeon about to get your wife breast augmentation. This dr performed successfull surgeries on pamela Anderson an many famous people. If he advised you to go with a d cup instead of a c cup. I'm not questioning him