The 2 Negatives of being red-shirted

[I.M. Fletcher]

Cannon played in his draft year. He started on the equivalent of short term ir

 

[BTTA]

Reading this, the issue has evolved for me to this: if a highly talented rookie (1st 2 rounds, let's say) gets hurt and spends a year on IR, how much does that limit his chances? I'm not concerned as much about the lower round and UDFA's. The info above strongly suggests that ship has left port.

Dowling is the one that comes to mind. He was playing at a level that indicted the staff thought highly of him, yet just didn't seem to have the physique that could stand the punishment. In that case, it was just genetics. But what about those players for whom the injury is not an indication of things to come?

 

[supafly]

Reading this, the issue has evolved for me to this: if a highly talented rookie (1st 2 rounds, let's say) gets hurt and spends a year on IR, how much does that limit his chances? I'm not concerned as much about the lower round and UDFA's. The info above strongly suggests that ship has left port.

Dowling is the one that comes to mind. He was playing at a level that indicted the staff thought highly of him, yet just didn't seem to have the physique that could stand the punishment. In that case, it was just genetics. But what about those players for whom the injury is not an indication of things to come?

I would think that the usual pattern would continue, even if it hasn't resulted in success for a redshirted player. At some point it's going to pay off, due to the law of averages alone.

 

[OhExaulted1]

Those stats are brutal for the red shirts' careers.
The only thing worse is what happened to the guys with the red shirts on old Star Trek episodes.

You mean these guys? Poor Ricky, I had high hopes for him.

 

[mgteich]

There is a word for those who do the same thing again and again, and expect different results.
======

A man flips a coin 9 times and it comes up heads 9 times. How would you bet the next time? What is likelihood of a head or of a tail. Some would bet a lot on tails, thinking that the law of averages will catch up. Some would say that the bet is the same 50% as always. Other would bet a lot on heads, seeing the past 9 times. Where do you stand and why?

I would think that the usual pattern would continue, even if it hasn't resulted in success for a redshirted player. At some point it's going to pay off, due to the law of averages alone.

 

[pencilneckgeek]

Marcus Cannon was placed on NFI in the 2011 preseason and played in the 2011 regular season.

A couple key points related to this:

• Cannon got-in 10 weeks of practice after being taken off the NFI list and through the playoffs.
• Cannon recovered from his first-year injury to be able to participate completely in the off-season program during the year when young players have the best chance to transform their young bodies into NFL-ready physiques. (Guys like Dowling who spent their off-seasons doing rehab missed-out on much of this chance, despite being the type who most needed it.)
• Cannon was a big, 2nd round talent with a non-football injury, which differs greatly from the folks who suffered from and were more susceptible to football injuries.

Some players aren't cut-out for the brutality of the pro game, but some young men develop more slowly and might benefit from a year in an NFL weight room, if they have a minor injury in the pre-season. It depends on the individual. Getting paid to learn and train isn't the worst outcome for a young, borderline NFL player, but borderline players don't have the best success rate in the league. Still, landing on the practice squad is probably a better outcome for most.

 

[Brewskies]

This is a confusing thread. Red shirting and IR are not one in the same and I don't think NFL teams red shirt players. an IR player settles because his injury has prevented him from being an NFL player. Other IR players try to make the team in the next season most don't make it. They are UDFA with less talent to start with so they don't make the cut, tried, got hurt, tried again and leave. Life goes on. Is this thread trying to say that teams are cheating or bastardizing the system?

 

[Miguel]

This is a confusing thread. Red shirting and IR are not one in the same and I don't think NFL teams red shirt players. an IR player settles because his injury has prevented him from being an NFL player. Other IR players try to make the team in the next season most don't make it. They are UDFA with less talent to start with so they don't make the cut, tried, got hurt, tried again and leave. Life goes on. Is this thread trying to say that teams are cheating or bastardizing the system?

No, that is not the point of the thread. My point is that each and every year we hear on this board the suggestion that the Patriots IR a player (usually a low-round draft pick or an UDFA) so as to red-shirt the player. I am trying to illustrate the downside of being IR'd when you are such a player.

 

[mcmurtry86]

No, that is not the point of the thread. My point is that each and every year we hear on this board the suggestion that the Patriots IR a player (usually a low-round draft pick or an UDFA) so as to red-shirt the player. I am trying to illustrate the downside of being IR'd when you are such a player.

Isn't the idea of "red shirting" to keep the player in the organization for an extra year because the player has shown some value but not enough to make the final 53? In that case, you'd want to give them a chance to compete for a spot in the following season.

If you're talking late round/UDFA types, the vast majority of those guys will fail to make the roster no matter how many opportunities you give them so it's not a surprise when it doesn't work out.

I also think most of the examples you gave are disingenuous. Most of the fringe rookies the Pats IR aren't with the team the next year because the team never intended to keep them. They're required to IR a guy they want to release but who suffered an injury with the team. so the vast majority of your examples are guys the team had no interest in keeping in year 1, let alone bringing them back in year 2.

I agree with your main point - fans' idea of "stashing" a rookie on IR is something that has never successfully happened in New England - but most of your "proof" isn't applicable. A guy like Markus Zusevics is an example of how the "redshirt" idea really works. He was injured when he came out of school, they signed him and put him on IR so that he could compete in camp the next year. Unfortunately, he got hurt again and placed on IR again in 2013 (before being released after the season). But he's an example of a guy who was put on IR his rookie year and got the chance to make it the following year.

 

[OhExaulted1]

No, that is not the point of the thread. My point is that each and every year we hear on this board the suggestion that the Patriots IR a player (usually a low-round draft pick or an UDFA) so as to red-shirt the player. I am trying to illustrate the downside of being IR'd when you are such a player.

More often than not players on the "Shadow Roster" end up being just that-Shadows. Never to be heard of or seen again. Very few end up being contributors.

For every Tom Brady there are a thousand Michael Bishop or Shockmain Davis types.

 

[OhExaulted1]

And BTW, I relish every opportunity to throw out a Shockmain Davis reference.

 

[patchick]

I would think that the usual pattern would continue, even if it hasn't resulted in success for a redshirted player.

I agree! And the usual pattern is that NO PLAYER IS EVER REDSHIRTED, EVER.

Of course rookies get injured, which sometimes lands them on IR. But I dare anybody to come up with a single instance where the Patriots used IR as a loophole to "stash" a player who they valued for the future but couldn't squeeze onto the 53. They just don't do that. Which makes sense, because as Miguel has illustrated it would be a stupid and counterproductive thing to do.

 

[supafly]

I agree! And the usual pattern is that NO PLAYER IS EVER REDSHIRTED, EVER.

Of course rookies get injured, which sometimes lands them on IR. But I dare anybody to come up with a single instance where the Patriots used IR as a loophole to "stash" a player who they valued for the future but couldn't squeeze onto the 53. They just don't do that. Which makes sense, because as Miguel has illustrated it would be a stupid and counterproductive thing to do.

I think the use of the term "stash" is up for interpretation because the truth is that every team "stashes" injured players who they don't expect to contribute that much. In other words, there are certainly players who could in theory, return in 5-6-7 weeks who are placed on IR. Is that any different from any other time of the season, or any different than what any other team does? No.

My point was that if a rookie gets injured in training camp again this year, and they believe that he can contribute in the future, they will keep him--even if that means placing him on IR. There are many variables that come into play such as positional depth, expected contribution, extent of injury, available roster space, designation of short-term IR, role of player, importance to the team, etc.

Every player should be assessed individually, but a minor to moderate injury during one's rookie season can quickly become an IR designation in the NFL, especially if you were not expected to contribute that much in the first place. For a team who constantly drafts for the future in terms of roster spots, contracts, etc--the NEP likely know this game better than most.

Do you honestly believe that many of our rookie selections were taken with the idea that they would make a major impact this season? I don't. Of course, this all depends on what your personal opinion of the "MRI is fine" reports regarding players such as Jeff Demps etc, or whether or not you believe in the highly reported "Foxborough Flu." I certainly don't know for a fact one way or another, and I'm not sure why you would take such a sure stance by stating your position in all caps yourself? The truth is that there are secrets and standards that we can only speculate about.

 

[supafly]

There is a word for those who do the same thing again and again, and expect different results.
======

A man flips a coin 9 times and it comes up heads 9 times. How would you bet the next time? What is likelihood of a head or of a tail. Some would bet a lot on tails, thinking that the law of averages will catch up. Some would say that the bet is the same 50% as always. Other would bet a lot on heads, seeing the past 9 times. Where do you stand and why?

If Tom Brady gets injured and is expected to miss 6-8 weeks, we are going to keep a roster spot open. If new rookie center Stork is injured and expected to miss 6-8 weeks, he's definitely going to be placed on IR.

How ever you wish to describe that process is up to you. Some would use the word "stashing" (probably incorrectly), while I would simply consider it the same kind of roster move made by all 32 teams, where other variables such as injuries and expected contributions are obviously taken into account.

 

[patchick]

My point was that if a rookie gets injured in training camp again this year, and they believe that he can contribute in the future, they will keep him--even if that means placing him on IR
...
Every player should be assessed individually, but a minor to moderate injury during one's rookie season can quickly become an IR designation in the NFL, especially if you were not expected to contribute that much in the first place.

Supafly, I believe what you're describing is the result of contractual requirements of the collective bargaining agreement. We see injured players "who were not expected to contribute" go to IR quickly before the season because they are not allowed to be cut. It's not a sign that the player is valued for the future.

Do you honestly believe that many of our rookie selections were taken with the idea that they would make a major impact this season? I don't. Of course, this all depends on what your personal opinion of the "MRI is fine" reports regarding players such as Jeff Demps etc, or whether or not you believe in the highly reported "Foxborough Flu." I certainly don't know for a fact one way or another, and I'm not sure why you would take such a sure stance by stating your position in all caps yourself? The truth is that there are secrets and standards that we can only speculate about.

I'll explain why I take such a sure stance that there is no such thing as the "Foxboro Flu": because for years now I've been looking for a single example of it, and challenging others to do the same, with no success.

Every year a rookie who fans liked goes to IR, and so the fans nod and say "Ah, the good old Foxboro Flu! Looking forward to seeing him next year, we can use him." Then the player is quietly cut in the offseason. He was never "stashed," just too injured to be waived. The Redshirt is the Bigfoot of Foxboro, with the extra twist that there's good reason to expect him to NOT exist, as Miguel has explained. Try the challenge yourself:

Find a promising Patriots rookie on the bubble who was sent to IR at final cutdowns despite no obvious major injury, and who returned to contribute to the team the following year.

I've come up empty. Meanwhile we have copious examples of promising rookies on the bubble being waived and signed to the practice squad -- or waived and signed by other teams, sometimes to Belichick's displeasure (paging Garrett Mills!). THAT is what happens to developmental prospects, not "stashing."

 

[supafly]

Supafly, I believe what you're describing is the result of contractual requirements of the collective bargaining agreement. We see injured players "who were not expected to contribute" go to IR quickly before the season because they are not allowed to be cut. It's not a sign that the player is valued for the future.



I'll explain why I take such a sure stance that there is no such thing as the "Foxboro Flu": because for years now I've been looking for a single example of it, and challenging others to do the same, with no success.

Every year a rookie who fans liked goes to IR, and so the fans nod and say "Ah, the good old Foxboro Flu! Looking forward to seeing him next year, we can use him." Then the player is quietly cut in the offseason. He was never "stashed," just too injured to be waived. The Redshirt is the Bigfoot of Foxboro, with the extra twist that there's good reason to expect him to NOT exist, as Miguel has explained. Try the challenge yourself:

Find a promising Patriots rookie on the bubble who was sent to IR at final cutdowns despite no obvious major injury, and who returned to contribute to the team the following year.

I've come up empty. Meanwhile we have copious examples of promising rookies on the bubble being waived and signed to the practice squad -- or waived and signed by other teams, sometimes to Belichick's displeasure (paging Garrett Mills!). THAT is what happens to developmental prospects, not "stashing."

I think that we're closer to being in agreement than you may think, aside from the fact that I don't equate the fact that we've yet to seen a successful return with meaning that no one is ever placed on IR in the hope that he may return in the future.

I'm not disputing your opinion or Miguel's opinion (or more accurately--fact) that no one has seemed to end up contributing in the future. I am however disputing the notion that it means it's impossible to happen at some point down the line.

 

[Urgent]

1.) By my count 14 rookies (Hines, Moe, Tuinei, Fisher, Ford, Mattes, Haggerty, Patterson, Chris McDonald, Grissom, Zusevics, Kamar Aiken, Anthony Rashad White, Schwab) were placed on IR before the start of the 2013 regular season. Only Mattes is on the Patriots roster now.

RJ Mattes released today - completing the sweep.

Miguel's point is pretty stark.

 

[mgteich]

One is certainly free to their own hopes and dreams. Of course, it not IMPOSSIBLE for someone down the line to be the first.

Sure, we HOPE that a rookie placed on IR will be the first to come back and be a significant contributor. We just don't expect anyone to be the first.

I think that we're closer to being in agreement than you may think, aside from the fact that I don't equate the fact that we've yet to seen a successful return with meaning that no one is ever placed on IR in the hope that he may return in the future.

I'm not disputing your opinion or Miguel's opinion (or more accurately--fact) that no one has seemed to end up contributing in the future. I am however disputing the notion that it means it's impossible to happen at some point down the line.

 

[Miguel]

2014 update

In 2014 4 rookies were placed on IR before the season.
Greg Orton was not tendered an ERFA offer and remains out of the NFL
Cameron Gordon - cut
Tyler Gaffney - placed on IR
James Morris - waived today

 

[OhExaulted1]

That doesn't bode well for Roberts and Derby. I think this may spell the end for Gaffney.