This wasn't part of the original announcement, but I've been reviewing the logic for determining how a player will react to a redshirt and I've made some changes. The new logic will be fairly simple.

- If you told a recruit that he would be redshirted during recruiting, then he will react well 100% of the time.

- If you told him him he would not be redshirted, then he will react well 0% of the time.

- If you promised start or minutes, then he will react well 0% of the time

In all other cases, the odds of reacting well are determined based on:

1. The player's class (less likely to react well the older the player)

2. Games the player is designated to miss due to injury (the more games means higher chance he'll react well)

3. Number of times you've attempted to redshirt him already (the more times, the less chance he'll react well)

4. Where the player rates out talent-wise on his team. So a player who is the 11th best guy on your team will be much more likely to react well than the 4th best guy on your team.
 

Question: So if I do not tell Player A that I will redshirt him, then he comes to campus and I try to RS the kid, he will always drop to a 1 WE? Or could he still drop to 5-15 WE points? I understand that he has to drop some WE points, but will it always go to 1 WE?

HEY EVERYONE 

"If you told him he would not be redshirted" means if you inform-of-redshirt-ed during recruiting and then undid that.  It does not mean if you didn't touch the redshirt button.

Posted by cornfused on 6/6/2012 12:44:00 PM (view original):

HEY EVERYONE 

 

"If you told him he would not be redshirted" means if you inform-of-redshirt-ed during recruiting and then undid that.  It does not mean if you didn't touch the redshirt button.

Posted by rednu on 6/6/2012 12:41:00 PM (view original):
I'm not sure I agree with the logic on No. 3 of the "in all other cases" section. 

I realize the intent here is to probably do away with the practice of giving/removing/regiving of the redshirt until you get a favorable RNG result and the kid takes it with no/minimal penalty. That said, it seems illogical to me that there's no counterweight given for where a kid will be more favorable to accept the redshirt as the season progresses and said player has yet to see a minute of live action. As I'm reading the above, the kid will respond the same if I offer a redshirt 14 times in the preseason or once a day for 14 days into the season, and that doesn't seem right. In the first case, the kid might be resistant thinking he can still contribute that year if given the chance. In the latter case, more than half a season has progressed and in that case a kid might finally be starting to see the writing on the wall and begin looking out for his longterm future, in which case saving the year of eligibility (so he can transfer, so he can play more at the school, whatever) would seem to be the better option.

I'm also a little confused by the "if you've told a kid he will not be redshirted" phrase. Is there a way we can tell a kid he won't be redshirted? Or will this now be the "default" belief of every recruit UNLESS they're informed there will be a redshirt? I'm just confused since start and minutes promises are covered under another line, and those would seem to me to be the only way a kid could get the impression within the game that he's not going to be redshirted.

Posted by rednu on 6/6/2012 12:41:00 PM (view original):
I'm not sure I agree with the logic on No. 3 of the "in all other cases" section. 

I realize the intent here is to probably do away with the practice of giving/removing/regiving of the redshirt until you get a favorable RNG result and the kid takes it with no/minimal penalty. That said, it seems illogical to me that there's no counterweight given for where a kid will be more favorable to accept the redshirt as the season progresses and said player has yet to see a minute of live action. As I'm reading the above, the kid will respond the same if I offer a redshirt 14 times in the preseason or once a day for 14 days into the season, and that doesn't seem right. In the first case, the kid might be resistant thinking he can still contribute that year if given the chance. In the latter case, more than half a season has progressed and in that case a kid might finally be starting to see the writing on the wall and begin looking out for his longterm future, in which case saving the year of eligibility (so he can transfer, so he can play more at the school, whatever) would seem to be the better option.

I'm also a little confused by the "if you've told a kid he will not be redshirted" phrase. Is there a way we can tell a kid he won't be redshirted? Or will this now be the "default" belief of every recruit UNLESS they're informed there will be a redshirt? I'm just confused since start and minutes promises are covered under another line, and those would seem to me to be the only way a kid could get the impression within the game that he's not going to be redshirted.