• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Jeremy Calhoun

druhag said:
grizfan95 said:
druhag said:
Is anyone sure he would even qualify for a redshirt next year? What I am getting at is he missed two games do to suspension. Does that factor in?

No. You have to actually play in 4 games, not just would have played.

Thanks.
Now I'm not the guy who makes the rules, and I am not the type to go look them up, but it seems to me that if you missed games do to suspension, those games should count towards your 4.

should, but as far as I've looked, they do not.
My thoughts are we do not know the actual facts, some may think they do, but are asshats and not sharing. Would guess it's one of 2 scenarios...the one given by Kem just above, or maybe he really is just "feeling it" and was hoping because of his numerous injuries/hits to get a redshirt to rest for a possible final push next year.
I love this new redshirt rule, but do not think it should be available for seniors unless there is an injury. It's going to lead to more transfers than they thought about, situations like this where that senior scholarship is "reserved" and some recruiting issues. You'll have pissed off recruits that say...oops, guess that school is a bunch of trick asses.
I love him as a player. Hope things work out, regardless of the situation, and hope his brother doesn't leave with him if he transfers somewhere.
 
Ursa Major said:
PlayerRep said:
Mich. St. starting running back to redshirt. Sorry if already posted. Didn't look at the whole chain.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/25236804/lj-scott-michigan-state-spartans-running-back-redshirt-mark-dantonio-says

Thanks for posting this. Interesting, in this case the player and family had input into the decision. Sounds like different philosophies are being used on how to apply this new 4 game limit.

Other than one is a senior that is injured and the other is a senior that got in trouble, missed some games, and give or take is relatively healthy for the part of the season he's played. Yes been banged around a bit, but nothing like a nagging ankle. Slightly different in my opinion.
 
AZDoc said:
Ursa Major said:
PlayerRep said:
Mich. St. starting running back to redshirt. Sorry if already posted. Didn't look at the whole chain.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/25236804/lj-scott-michigan-state-spartans-running-back-redshirt-mark-dantonio-says

Thanks for posting this. Interesting, in this case the player and family had input into the decision. Sounds like different philosophies are being used on how to apply this new 4 game limit.

Other than one is a senior that is injured and the other is a senior that got in trouble, missed some games, and give or take is relatively healthy for the part of the season he's played. Yes been banged around a bit, but nothing like a nagging ankle. Slightly different in my opinion.

The difference I’m directly referring to is the process of having the players and families input. Nonsurpising, Coach Napoleon doesn’t seem to put much stock in that.
 
Napoleon-As-Football-Coach-75228.jpg
 
Logic dictates that all potential redshirts should be agreed upon early in the year, like in fall camp. It also dictates that one party changed their mind recently and wanted to change the agreement. Who wanted to change the agreement I have no idea. I will leave that to the geniuses that think the Russians consorted with Hauck to get at a poor kid with a fragile melon.
 
I think BH should tell Calhoun he can come back next year if he can beat BH in a race to the M at 5:00 a.m. Wednesday morning. Calhoun will show up at 4:50, and wait around with no sign of Bobby anywhere. When Bobby finally shows up just short of five bells, he tells Calhoun to just go ahead without him because he had too many milks last night and doesn't feel well. Calhoun heads up the mountain figuring that he has a spot on the 2019 team; all he has to do is make it to the M. As he's huffing and puffing and approaching the M, he sees that somebody is already there. That's right, it's Bobby Hauck, and he's filling out release paperwork that prohibits Calhoun from playing anywhere else in the BSC. You know, to make an example?
 
Ursa Major said:
AZDoc said:
Ursa Major said:
PlayerRep said:
Mich. St. starting running back to redshirt. Sorry if already posted. Didn't look at the whole chain.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/25236804/lj-scott-michigan-state-spartans-running-back-redshirt-mark-dantonio-says

Thanks for posting this. Interesting, in this case the player and family had input into the decision. Sounds like different philosophies are being used on how to apply this new 4 game limit.

Other than one is a senior that is injured and the other is a senior that got in trouble, missed some games, and give or take is relatively healthy for the part of the season he's played. Yes been banged around a bit, but nothing like a nagging ankle. Slightly different in my opinion.

The difference I’m directly referring to is the process of having the players and families input. Nonsurpising, Coach Napoleon doesn’t seem to put much stock in that.

Ah...gotcha. Re-reading your post i see that now. Sorry.
 
Why the fuc% would parents have input regarding a senior on the team? He is a grown man.

I get parents of recruits may ask questions about redshirting. Parents of seniors....no.
 
Also, BH could have said:

“JC wanted to redshirt and forego the last two games of the season, but I felt we needed him to play and I couldn’t guarantee a spot on the roster next season in case one of my other kids wanted to play.”

But instead, he threw the kid under the bus and implied that he was a quitter.

Classy.
 
SoldierGriz said:
Why the fuc% would parents have input regarding a senior on the team? He is a grown man.

I get parents of recruits may ask questions about redshirting. Parents of seniors....no.

I believe most cognitive development experts would disagree that a 22 year old is a grown adult.
 
AllWeatherFan said:
Also, BH could have said:

“JC wanted to redshirt and forego the last two games of the season, but I felt we needed him to play and I couldn’t guarantee a spot on the roster next season in case one of my other kids wanted to play.”

But instead, he threw the kid under the bus and implied that he was a quitter.

Classy.

When has anyone thought Bobby was classy?
 
cclarkblues said:
Logic dictates that all potential redshirts should be agreed upon early in the year, like in fall camp. It also dictates that one party changed their mind recently and wanted to change the agreement. Who wanted to change the agreement I have no idea. I will leave that to the geniuses that think the Russians consorted with Hauck to get at a poor kid with a fragile melon.

Is it logic or competence at the HC level that dictates you save redshirt opportunities for year ending injuries or other such circumstances that might arise during the season?
 
Ursa Major said:
SoldierGriz said:
Why the fuc% would parents have input regarding a senior on the team? He is a grown man.

I get parents of recruits may ask questions about redshirting. Parents of seniors....no.

I believe most cognitive development experts would disagree that a 22 year old is a grown adult.

I have led thousands of 18-22 year olds...in places all over the globe. They are grown men. Period.
 
grizindabox said:
AllWeatherFan said:
Also, BH could have said:

“JC wanted to redshirt and forego the last two games of the season, but I felt we needed him to play and I couldn’t guarantee a spot on the roster next season in case one of my other kids wanted to play.”

But instead, he threw the kid under the bus and implied that he was a quitter.

Classy.

When has anyone thought Bobby was classy?

:lol: :lol: That's a tough point to argue against, box.
 
AllWeatherFan said:
Also, BH could have said:

“JC wanted to redshirt and forego the last two games of the season, but I felt we needed him to play and I couldn’t guarantee a spot on the roster next season in case one of my other kids wanted to play.”

But instead, he threw the kid under the bus and implied that he was a quitter.

Classy.

Well, apparently he did quit. He quit on his team. Therefor he is indeed a quitter.
 
SoldierGriz said:
Ursa Major said:
SoldierGriz said:
Why the fuc% would parents have input regarding a senior on the team? He is a grown man.

I get parents of recruits may ask questions about redshirting. Parents of seniors....no.

I believe most cognitive development experts would disagree that a 22 year old is a grown adult.

I have led thousands of 18-22 year olds...in places all over the globe. They are grown men. Period.

You're right. Fuck science. Goddamn eggheads.
 
maroonandsilver said:
AllWeatherFan said:
Also, BH could have said:

“JC wanted to redshirt and forego the last two games of the season, but I felt we needed him to play and I couldn’t guarantee a spot on the roster next season in case one of my other kids wanted to play.”

But instead, he threw the kid under the bus and implied that he was a quitter.

Classy.

Well, apparently he did quit. He quit on his team. Therefor he is indeed a quitter.

I agree that it was Stitt’s fault.
 
AllWeatherFan said:
maroonandsilver said:
AllWeatherFan said:
Also, BH could have said:

“JC wanted to redshirt and forego the last two games of the season, but I felt we needed him to play and I couldn’t guarantee a spot on the roster next season in case one of my other kids wanted to play.”

But instead, he threw the kid under the bus and implied that he was a quitter.

Classy.

Well, apparently he did quit. He quit on his team. Therefor he is indeed a quitter.

I agree that it was Stitt’s fault.

:lol: I believe the term, Stitt's Fault, literally translates into Latin as: reductio ad absurdum.
 
horribilisfan8184 said:
cclarkblues said:
Logic dictates that all potential redshirts should be agreed upon early in the year, like in fall camp. It also dictates that one party changed their mind recently and wanted to change the agreement. Who wanted to change the agreement I have no idea. I will leave that to the geniuses that think the Russians consorted with Hauck to get at a poor kid with a fragile melon.

Is it logic or competence at the HC level that dictates you save redshirt opportunities for year ending injuries or other such circumstances that might arise during the season?

That's for you to decide, although I believe you already have. I just think there was already a plan and then someone derailed it. Are you advocating no freshman redshirts so that you can save them for potential future injuries?
 
Back
Top