If it is after the 3rd conference game, just redshirt the damn kid. And he's bothered by a nagging injury. It should really be a no-brainer by that point.
He should be able to do what he wants. If he wants to play, let him play. If he wants to sit for a year, let him sit.
At what point does the possibility of him playing a fifth season in a meaningful year and restoring some balance to an obscenely unbalanced roster trump playing in a lost season? 14 games? 12 games? 9 games? We have the worst roster balance in the entire country if he plays this year. We could have only ONE natural junior OR senior in 5 years (Ponds).
I und
If it is after the 3rd conference game, just redshirt the damn kid. And he's bothered by a nagging injury. It should really be a no-brainer by that point.
He should be able to do what he wants. If he wants to play, let him play. If he wants to sit for a year, let him sit.
At what point does the possibility of him playing a fifth season in a meaningful year and restoring some balance to an obscenely unbalanced roster trump playing in a lost season? 14 games? 12 games? 9 games? We have the worst roster balance in the entire country if he plays this year. We could have only ONE natural junior OR senior in 5 years (Ponds).
I understand your point, from the school's/program's perspective. But the kid chose to come to this school, so the school should look for what is best for this kid. If he thinks that what's best for him is to play this year, then he should play.
I presume (a big presumption) he wants to play professionally somewhere. A player has such a limited window to maximize his potential that he should have the right do what he wants - what's good for him, even if it goes counter to the balancing of when scholarships free up. This is very clear-cut to me. Let him play if he wants.