Realistic Redshirt Re-actions Topic

ixolabrat
Posts: 117 (0)
Hall of Famer
177
Prospect
I just slapped on the redshirt on a DI-player who played exactly ZERO minutes this season. With my team not in the playoffs our season and his is effectively over. He is upset that he was redshirted after not complaining about playing time at any point in the season. I think it's pretty unrealistic that this player would be ******** about being redshirted. In real life he'd probably be glad now after riding the pine all year, that he gets another year of eligibility.

Just wondering if any attempt to create a more realistic end of season redshirting process has been discussed ... probably has, I just didn't see it.

Just sucks to work your way to DI, get a somewhat reasonable player on your low-level team, and then have his WE take a hit which ruins him as a player reaching his potential going further. I could've lived with his response if he had complained during the year about seeing no court time. 

Go Brown!! lol


2/17/2012 5:45 PM
blackdog3377
Posts: 1691 (0)
Hall of Famer
190 2 1
Prospect
I think a realistic thing would be if a kid doesn't play the whole season and then refuses the redshirt he is almost guaranteed to transfer unless he is promised big minutes next season.
2/17/2012 6:26 PM
milkamania
Posts: 295 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 201 1
Rookie
as long as fresmen don't complain about PT, allowing someone to sit a frosh all year, and then use the fact that he didn't play to get him to take a RS he wouldn't have taken at the beginning of the year would just be a loophole.   he has to react the same way no matter when you do it, or you make putting a RS on a freshman too easy.  other option of course is to have freshman complain about PT of course
2/17/2012 6:46 PM
dahsdebater
Posts: 10046 (3)
Hall of Famer
284 293 18
Pro
If we want to be truly realistic, you shouldn't HAVE to "apply a redshirt" to a player who doesn't play all year.  He should just get another year of eligibility.  He didn't play - that's all that the game's concept of "apply redshirt" really means...  Of course, for that to work freshmen would indeed need to be more likely to complain about PT.
2/17/2012 7:42 PM
tianyi7886
Posts: 4243 (0)
Hall of Famer
51 33 282 40
Prospect
Posted by blackdog3377 on 2/17/2012 6:26:00 PM (view original):
I think a realistic thing would be if a kid doesn't play the whole season and then refuses the redshirt he is almost guaranteed to transfer unless he is promised big minutes next season.
+1
2/17/2012 7:56 PM
jskenner
Posts: 246 (0)
Hall of Famer
249
Prospect
IMO, players who refuse the RS after not playing during the freshman hear should be set to complain big time during the freshman year about not playing. In other words, the unrealistic part is NOT that the player won't accept the RS. The unrealistic part is that the player (who ultimately won't be happy about the RS) is otherwise perfectly content to sit on the bench the entire season. I've had this happen to me (had one just last season with Quinnipiac) where the guy didn't play a minute and then refuses the RS. It was no doubt frustrating, and when I'm honest with myself, I realize the "realistic" solution would not be to have the player accept the RS but to have the player start complaining early and often about enough playing time as a freshmen, even without promised minutes.
2/17/2012 8:16 PM
mullycj
Posts: 2737 (0)
Hall of Famer
214 1
Prospect
Posted by dahsdebater on 2/17/2012 7:42:00 PM (view original):
If we want to be truly realistic, you shouldn't HAVE to "apply a redshirt" to a player who doesn't play all year.  He should just get another year of eligibility.  He didn't play - that's all that the game's concept of "apply redshirt" really means...  Of course, for that to work freshmen would indeed need to be more likely to complain about PT.

When a player "declines" the redshirt what he is really saying is that at the end of 4 years of college he plans on going into the workforce to earn some dough.   
2/17/2012 8:45 PM
professor17
Posts: 366 (0)
Hall of Famer
222 13
Rookie
Redshirting is simply a risk/reward feature of the game. You can't view this as real kids making rational choices.

You can choose to spend extra money to notify and guarantee a redshirt during recruiting, at the risk of not being able to sign the player or disrupting your entire recruiting strategy.

Or you can choose not to notify of RS to make recruiting easier, at the risk that the kid will never accept a redshirt with an acceptable WE.

It's a risk/reward choice you make upfront. That's all. To allow a kid to RS with no risk involved, at the end of the season, just because you intentionally parked  him on the bench, defeats the entire purpose of having the notify of RS option, and penalizes those who did make the choice to notify. You can't have your cake and eat it, too.
2/17/2012 9:31 PM (edited)
ixolabrat
Posts: 117 (0)
Hall of Famer
177
Prospect
We'll he is at Brown ... so undoubtedly with his Law Degree, he will enter the work force and immediately sue me for wrecking his potential pro ball career by sitting him his frosh year!!

I get all to the counter points and arguments weighed in.

We Ivy's want our cake and to eat it too!! lol
2/17/2012 9:57 PM
girt25
Posts: 2136 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 122 1 1
Rookie
Posted by professor17 on 2/17/2012 9:31:00 PM (view original):
Redshirting is simply a risk/reward feature of the game. You can't view this as real kids making rational choices.

You can choose to spend extra money to notify and guarantee a redshirt during recruiting, at the risk of not being able to sign the player or disrupting your entire recruiting strategy.

Or you can choose not to notify of RS to make recruiting easier, at the risk that the kid will never accept a redshirt with an acceptable WE.

It's a risk/reward choice you make upfront. That's all. To allow a kid to RS with no risk involved, at the end of the season, just because you intentionally parked  him on the bench, defeats the entire purpose of having the notify of RS option, and penalizes those who did make the choice to notify. You can't have your cake and eat it, too.
My thoughts exactly, prof.
2/17/2012 11:13 PM
jskenner
Posts: 246 (0)
Hall of Famer
249
Prospect

girt and prof, would you agree that freshmen players who won't accept the RS (after not playing all year) SHOULD also be programmed by HD logic to start complaining DURING the season because of lack of PT (along with big WE drops, and the chance of transferring)? THIS is the part I find silly. NOT the fact they don't accept the RS. After all, a player who is set to not accept a RS would practically always need PT to keep him happy, and it's not realistic to think a player who in no case will take the RS would be content to not get decent playing time.

2/18/2012 3:24 AM
professor17
Posts: 366 (0)
Hall of Famer
222 13
Rookie
I understand what you're saying jskenner, and what you say may well be true in the real world, but I don't think it's something that makes sense for this game. If you RS a player you're getting a significant benefit out of a 5th year of ratings and IQ development that the vast majority of players don't get. It's a big advantage to have.

The current RS logic is set up so that it's not automatic that you can get that benefit. You've got to put something at risk to get it, and you may not succeed. So if you fail to get the RS you wanted due to a choice you made upfront, what you're advocating is essentially a double-penalty of the player possibly transferring or losing WE anyway. That doesn't make sense, and adds nothing to the game IMO. Now you almost always have to notify of RS unless you plan to give the freshman big minutes, which really makes it less of a choice/strategy, and more of a requirement. And if you bring in multiple freshmen that you expect to be at the end of the bench... I guess you'd have to notify on all of them to make sure they didn't all transfer.

It's basically calling for the vast majority of freshmen players to now having playing-time expectations. Personally, I don't think there should be freshmen playing time requirements unless promises are made, or perhaps in the case of elite level players.

Again, you can't think of this as the actions of real thinking players. It's just another layer of strategy to the game, where you have to make a choice during recruiting about whether to notify or not.



2/18/2012 10:12 AM (edited)
kmasonbx
Posts: 847 (0)
Hall of Famer
210
Prospect
Posted by milkamania on 2/17/2012 6:46:00 PM (view original):
as long as fresmen don't complain about PT, allowing someone to sit a frosh all year, and then use the fact that he didn't play to get him to take a RS he wouldn't have taken at the beginning of the year would just be a loophole.   he has to react the same way no matter when you do it, or you make putting a RS on a freshman too easy.  other option of course is to have freshman complain about PT of course
It makes no sense that a player wouldn't complain about playing all season but then complain about being RS'd. If he's ****** about being RS'd he should be ****** that he didn't get any playing time, you can't be fine with sitting but be upset about getting a RS when the RS actually makes the sitting worth it. Another thing is, in real life if a player doesn't play at all for the season, he automatically gets a RS, at least as far as I know.
2/18/2012 11:14 AM
girt25
Posts: 2136 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 122 1 1
Rookie
As prof is saying, you're taking this too literally in real world context, as opposed to what it represents in the context of the game.
2/18/2012 4:32 PM
jskenner
Posts: 246 (0)
Hall of Famer
249
Prospect
Ultimately, I think I disagree with you, professor and girt. For example, if a top team signs a top player, I would like to see the game require giving the player significant minutes to avoid the WE drops and the possibility of transfer, even if no promises were made. The application to RL is obvious. And in HD terms, it would prevent top teams from signing top talent and having it sit on the bench. This is just an example. Another would be a mid-major signing a good player, who would also require PT to stay content. In my current case with Quinnipiac, I signed who I think was a 2-star guard with solid skills, very much on par with my top reserves at that position. I'd like to see the game require minutes for the player akin to the above example, if he has the mind set to not accept the RS without ill effect. And I'd like the game to include meaningful intelligence to know if the player will be ok with sitting or not. Again, I imagine you both disagree with me, and that's cool. I think my way brings more nuance/depth to a game which needs such added elements, as opposed to (team recruits players, team develops players, team plays games, and so on). JMO.
2/18/2012 6:01 PM
12 Next ▸
Realistic Redshirt Re-actions Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.