I am still having trouble figuring out the purpose of greyshirts as opposed to a standard walk-on.
So is a greyshirt essentially another redshirt year?
- Thread starter VirgilCain
- Start date
I am still having trouble figuring out the purpose of greyshirts as opposed to a standard walk-on.
this keeps their eligibility clocks from starting until the next season. So they would still have 5 years to play 4 seasons starting a year after high school.
Grey shirts aren't on scholarship or on the team in the fall, but are on campus going to school and working out.
They are promised scholarships in the spring - so they count against next year's class.
What's never made sense to me is, if the kid isn't good enough to be in the 25 best players you can sign this year, why would you use a spot for him against the best 25 you can sign next year?
They are promised scholarships in the spring - so they count against next year's class.
What's never made sense to me is, if the kid isn't good enough to be in the 25 best players you can sign this year, why would you use a spot for him against the best 25 you can sign next year?
someone to greyshirt that he thinks is good enough to sign. So they take a 2011 scholarship. And it doesn't take up a slot in the 2011 class b/c he'll then just get one of those guys to greyshirt and take a slot in the 2012 class.
Like I said, you are just continuously giving away the next year's scholarships so you never really lose a slot.
the real question is why the hell someone would pay their way for a semester when they could go to a legitmate other offer.
Like I said, you are just continuously giving away the next year's scholarships so you never really lose a slot.
the real question is why the hell someone would pay their way for a semester when they could go to a legitmate other offer.
why not just ask him to the kid to walk on and then evaluate whether or not he deserves a scholly in spring? seems like a damn near 100% way to waste a scholly.
VirgilCain said:
The difference is the walk on starts his eligibility clock immediately.
For instance, let's take Mike Marry and Andrew Ritter as examples. Both signed in our 2009 class. Marry took a grayshirt. Ritter walked on. Ritter's clock started in the 2009 season, so his eligibility is for the 2009, 10, 11, 12, and 13 seasons, if he were to use a redshirt in the future.
Marry enrolled part time in the fall, and he goes on scholarship this spring. His eligibility clock starts with 2010, so his clock includes the 2010, 11, 12, 13, and 14 seasons if he were to redshirt at some point.
There is definitely a difference. The walk on pays full time enrollment the first year and gets to join the team. The grayshirt pays part time enrollment the first semester and doesn't get to join the team until the spring.
Ritter = preferred walk on
Marry = grayshirt
And for the record, the only reason I could see why you would accept an offer like that over other immediate offers is if you really like the program, coach, or school that much better than the others you are considering. In Ritter's case, he grew up an Ole Miss fan, so he was willing to walk on at Ole Miss over taking an immediate scholarship at Arkansas.
ETA: Grayshirting is something like an extra redshirt year, with the main difference being that during that grayshirt semester, you can't use the team facilities, you can't practice with the team, and in general you can't do any team activities. You are essentially a regular, non-athlete student. Marry and Swindall both had to work out at the Turner Center on their own to stay in shape this fall. The staff is allowed to give them a work out plan, but they can't supervise and they can't enforce it.
So the coach is basically gambling that the greyshirt (who he doesn't think is worth a full scholly) is going to be better than one of the potential 25 FULL SCHOLARSHIP guys that he can sign the following year, am I right there?
like I said above, if you can convince someone in the next years class to greyshirt, which nutt seems to be pretty damn good at doing. Nafoom reported yesterday that Eric Mitchell has agreed to redshirt if need be.
These fools must love some Ajax.
These fools must love some Ajax.
it sounds like once you get started with greyshirts, you have to keep giving them out every year. Therefore you can't recruit a couple full scholarship players that you would have otherwise, instead you have to find the low caliber players that are willing to accept greyshirts. Granted it will be the last of the full sholarships given out, but they have to be markedly better than the guys who are going to accept a greyshirt.
greyshirt is. they are guaranteed a scholarship in the spring and take up a spot in that springs (the spring that they get a scholly) signing class. If this is true, then the coach would have to continue to offer more greyshirts in that recruiting class or just only recruit the number of scholarship spots left.
it still sounds like a pretty weak idea to me.
it still sounds like a pretty weak idea to me.
He is technically correct. There is no "guarantee" that a player offered a greyshirt will be put on scholarship. It's not like there is a "Greyshirt LOI" which obligates the school to place these players on scholarship in January of the next year; the prospect is taking the coach at his word. The coach/school is free to tell the recruit "thanks but no thanks" if he wants, and I'm pretty sure that has happened after coaching changes. I think that is what he was trying to say.
You are, however, correct in practice.
You are, however, correct in practice.
They aren't "guaranteed" for all 4-5 years, correct? not trying to be argumentative. Just bored and interested in what the hell these guys are told/doing.
I'm sure there are exceptions to the rule. But these kids are definitely the scrubs of signing class. I can see possibly getting a good punter/kicker to greyshirt and being excited, but for the most part these guys are just a step above walk-ons (maybe not, since walk-ons are actually on the team immediately). For the most part, they will just be excellent tackling dummies.
Its a risk they take, but so is a player on scholly. Scholarships are year by year. A coach can pull it at any time although its not common practice.
that is what it is...they are not guaranteed ****. They all have different conditions they must meeting depending on the circumstance. Many of them are academic risks that are told "it doesn't appear you will qualify, but if you do you will grayshirt." Others are injury concerns ...See Gabriel Hunter last year who is now somewhere else. A school is not obligated to put the kid on scholarship the next year. They just aren't. If they have better players in the next class they want to sign...they can. Might piss somebody off but they can. If it turns out for whatever reason they are not worthy of taking a spot they would be cut loose and encouraged to move on. There is no real concern about this never-ending cycle you seem to think would happen.
Mike Marry and Evan Swindoll appear to have been in situations where they were willing to take one for the team. I assume they are convinced (maybe rightfully so) that in the long run they are better off not burning a year of eligibility while working out and easing into college. Both had other BCS offers but went along with it and after bowl practice they are both obviously very good players with a chance to contribute next year.
Mike Marry and Evan Swindoll appear to have been in situations where they were willing to take one for the team. I assume they are convinced (maybe rightfully so) that in the long run they are better off not burning a year of eligibility while working out and easing into college. Both had other BCS offers but went along with it and after bowl practice they are both obviously very good players with a chance to contribute next year.
there are various reasons why a kid may redshirt. Mike Marry did last year and is most certainly not a scrub. It is a way to buy a kid time for whatever the reason may be before he burns a year.
apparently i need to follow recruiting better. I still think that whoever is the exception and not the commonality.
Im done posting on this, I'm sure you are too.
Im done posting on this, I'm sure you are too.