In all seriousness Ware deserves a redshirt after what happened to him , regardless if he meets any requirement. He should of been shut down from the start.

Right. Sorry, that sentence was a little confusing. I meant that only in nine of the games did he register any minutes at all, that is to say, he only played in nine of the team's 13 games.

 

It is all good....:lol2:

 

In all seriousness Ware deserves a redshirt after what happened to him , regardless if he meets any requirement. He should of been shut down from the start.

 

He came back way to soon IMO. Had he sit out till the first of the year, I don't think he would be having these issues now. Any update on him and his rehab?

Actually the earlier part is the typo. UofL is scheduled for 3,100 regular season games.

 

Made me laugh!

In all seriousness Ware deserves a redshirt after what happened to him , regardless if he meets any requirement. He should of been shut down from the start.

 

I had to reread that. I thought you wrote "should have been PUT down from the start." (a la horses)

Still don't think it's fair to let a kid play, then redshirt him.

 

What is the rule for football?

 

Kentucky did the same with Jared Prickett years ago.

I'm a bit confused. Is this a new injury or related to the one last year? I would think it would have to be an injury from the current year to qualify.

I'm a bit confused. Is this a new injury or related to the one last year? I would think it would have to be an injury from the current year to qualify.

A) Is that actually a requirement?

 

B) He reinjured it this season.

 

C) Do you really think the NCAA would deny a medical redshirt request from the player with the highest profile injury since at least Willis Mcgahee?

A) Is that actually a requirement?

 

B) He reinjured it this season.

 

C) Do you really think the NCAA would deny a medical redshirt request from the player with the highest profile injury since at least Willis Mcgahee?

We are talking the NCAA. Who knows?

A) Is that actually a requirement? B) He reinjured it this season. C) Do you really think the NCAA would deny a medical redshirt request from the player with the highest profile injury since at least Willis Mcgahee?

 

I have no idea if it's a requirement. I would just think logically that if a player was injured in a prior year but came back and played in the current one that it would hurt their case. This doesn't apply here , but think of it in this way - what if that player sat out most of the year but played in 29% at the end instead of the beginning. A player to give them a boost at tourney time but essentially steal another year of eligibility.

 

I'm not trying to say that Ware doesn't deserve one though I certainly think they should have just redshirted him in the first place. And I have long ago stopped trying to make sense of NCAA decisions. If you think it's a lock just because it's high profile then you haven't followed the NCAA's mind numbing decision process.

A) Is that actually a requirement? B) He reinjured it this season. C) Do you really think the NCAA would deny a medical redshirt request from the player with the highest profile injury since at least Willis Mcgahee?

 

If he doesn't meet the requirements then no, he doesn't deserve one just because of what happened in March. By saying he does then you hit a slippery slope with other similar incidents and you're basically saying because it was high profile, and not because of the injury itself or when it happened, he deserves a redshirt. That'll open a lot of unwanted trouble.

When he first injured his leg this season, I thought it was the other one... I could be completely wrong, and I'm not even sure why I remember thinking that, but for some reason I was thinking it was his other leg.

I have no idea if it's a requirement. I would just think logically that if a player was injured in a prior year but came back and played in the current one that it would hurt their case. This doesn't apply here , but think of it in this way - what if that player sat out most of the year but played in 29% at the end instead of the beginning. A player to give them a boost at tourney time but essentially steal another year of eligibility.

 

I'm not trying to say that Ware doesn't deserve one though I certainly think they should have just redshirted him in the first place. And I have long ago stopped trying to make sense of NCAA decisions. If you think it's a lock just because it's high profile then you haven't followed the NCAA's mind numbing decision process.

 

The 30 percent of games played has to come in the first half if the season. If e were to play in the tourny instead of playing early, he wouldn't get a medical redshirt.

The 30 percent of games played has to come in the first half if the season. If e were to play in the tourny instead of playing early, he wouldn't get a medical redshirt.

 

Gotcha. Whoops on my part with that.

I have no idea if it's a requirement. I would just think logically that if a player was injured in a prior year but came back and played in the current one that it would hurt their case. This doesn't apply here , but think of it in this way - what if that player sat out most of the year but played in 29% at the end instead of the beginning. A player to give them a boost at tourney time but essentially steal another year of eligibility.

 

I'm not trying to say that Ware doesn't deserve one though I certainly think they should have just redshirted him in the first place. And I have long ago stopped trying to make sense of NCAA decisions. If you think it's a lock just because it's high profile then you haven't followed the NCAA's mind numbing decision process.

 

This was my thinking too.

And you only care because he plays for Louisville... Move along.

 

Yes and no. I do care because he plays for the little brother and no I do care because I wanted to know the rule.