Forget the redshirt!!

[raincat]

I’m all confused. Don’t you get four years of eligibility plus a red shirt year that you can participate in practice but not play? What would be the logic of putting off your redshirt until you’re a senior?

You're kind of missing the point, I think. In the case of the dismissed Huskies, they HAD (or at least THOUGHT they had) redshirted their freshman year. That is to say, they practiced but didn't play. As they approached the end of thier 4th year (their 3rd year playing), Willingham said he didn't want them back, and told them that they had used up their 4 years of eligibility. That is to say, he essentially took away their use of the redshirt their freshman year and counted it as a season of eligibility. While Locker "redshirted" last year, TW is not guaranteeing him that he won't do the same thing to him that he did to other players.

And just to take it one last step...let's look at the most obvious "no redshirt schools", Army, Navy and Air Force. They do the class work, graduate "on time" and move on. They are not around for five years. Notre Dame is a little like that. They do not recruit anyone with the idea they will "redshirt". At best, incoming freshmen hope to play right away, or at least participate on the scout team. They have four years to play. Even if someone didn't get on the field as a freshman and is an All-American in their fourth year of participation, they are done. No coming back for a 5th year even though technically they have another year left. You can go to the ND athletic website, bring up the roster, and are unlikely to see any upper classman whose bio says "redshirtted as a freshman". Not saying their isn't one, but it's most likely due to an injury. Willingham is taking a middle road. Basically he's saying "plan on a four year career and if you still have a year of eligibility in your fifth year, we'll decide if we want to make you the offer. You have to earn it!" As GrizinWashington correctly pointed out, some of the Husky's claim they were unaware of the new approach he was bringing, and if nothing else, violated the spirit of the agreement they thought they had as "redshirts".
But programs like ND live in a different world, recruiting the best young athletes in the nation. Often for Playoff Division schools the first year is a season for training and physical development.

[Weltercat]

I’m all confused. Don’t you get four years of eligibility plus a red shirt year that you can participate in practice but not play? What would be the logic of putting off your redshirt until you’re a senior?

You're kind of missing the point, I think. In the case of the dismissed Huskies, they HAD (or at least THOUGHT they had) redshirted their freshman year. That is to say, they practiced but didn't play. As they approached the end of thier 4th year (their 3rd year playing), Willingham said he didn't want them back, and told them that they had used up their 4 years of eligibility. That is to say, he essentially took away their use of the redshirt their freshman year and counted it as a season of eligibility. While Locker "redshirted" last year, TW is not guaranteeing him that he won't do the same thing to him that he did to other players.

So Locker did red shirt last year but Coach Willingham is just saying that he reserves the right to not give him his scholarship his senior year if he is not cutting the mustard. That is not unlike Coach Kramer or any other NCAA Coach or program in the country.

[Bleedinbluengold]

Regardless of how Willingham presented it, all of the players who did not play in a game their freshman year may still have 1 year of eligibility remaining. They all had 5 years to use 4 years of eligibility. Presumably, they appear to have used 3 years of eligibility in 4 years.

They may be able to get a 1-time transfer exception and play next fall ------ somewhere.