Redshirt question

If a kid isn't going to get to compere he might as well redshirt. If he graduates in four years he has the option to compete in the fifth year as a grad student.

One thing to keep in mind is that there are 12.6 scholarship for a fully funded track program.  That 12.6 also includes the scholarships for the X-Country folks as well.  A  track program will have somewhere around 60 kids or so (not sure of roster limits) so most athletes are not receiving any money.  Most reasons to red shirt have nothing to do with scholarship money.

There are various reasons to red shirt.  As a freshman many kids are not ready to compete at the college level.  By delaying things a year they will be better prepared.  There is a pretty big jump from HS track to college (I ran in college).  A lot of kids go into somewhat of a slump or at least plateau for a while when transiting. Unlike a lot of other sports a red shirt can still compete in T&F meet.  They just need to do it as part of a track club and not on the varsity team.  

Alternatively there maybe upperclassman who are as good or better then your friend in a particular event.  By having the underclassman red shirt they will prolong the time they have a good athlete in a particular event.  

How is he doing academically?  If he is border line the coach may want to give him sometime to adjust to college without the pressure of having to compete.  

If they suffered an injury that is now healed but kept them from getting significant training time the coach may decide to red shirt to give them additional time to heal.

Reason?  The coach makes out the line up. If you don't have a choice, you don't need a reason.  The year counts against the five year clock whether you acquiesce to the coach's decision or not.  

If an athlete who is already at school and has started the five year clock subsequently finds out the coach won't provide an opportunity to compete freshman year, the original plan of playing through four years of eligibility is already imperiled.  The only way to salvage that possibility is to go along with the coach's plan and hope to compete in subsequent years.  What the athlete and the family decide to do about the fifth year is a decision that can wait.

Obviously two perspectives on this situation.  As Stafford points out, why would a walk-on athlete's family want to pay for five years of college in order for their son to be able to compete for four?  A walk-on athlete might rather compete for four years, get their degree, and start their business career. 

From the coach's perspective, he has enough confidence in his coaching ability to believe that he can train this athlete to the point that he can be a key contributor later in his career, and the coach wants to have the athlete's best four years, not just their first four years.

If we equate this to a baseball athlete, I think many of us would be glad to know that the coach was upfront with the athlete about his plans to redshirt him, rather than putting him in for just a few at bats or innings on the mound and burning a year of eligibility.

Agree with all.  I was a redshirt baseball player, wasn't given the option because there wasn't a roster spot for me as a pitcher (same idea with older guys, and I probably wasn't ready either).  Thought school would take me 4.5 - 5 years and ended up taking 5.5 so it worked out perfectly.  That was for an Education degree and I knew the program expectations were longer than 4 years.