Pick Up The Damn Phone Comment Count

Brian

21536344272_e670d65acc_z

[Patrick Barron]

You will not be surprised that the Rashad Weaver decommitment set off another media/twitter/message board tempest. The guy who called Kyle Flood "real" two weeks before his grade-fixing scandal came to light has weighed in. Teddy Greenstein has resumed calling Michael Spath a hack so he doesn't have to actually address Michigan's point of view. Lawyers from Alabama have invaded my mentions.

This is not a good state of affairs. It is not the End of Integrity, as the pearl-clutching wing of the fanbase has fretted. The decommits will sign elsewhere; they won't have to transfer or take a medical midway through their careers. Finding yourself with a guy who would be better off elsewhere is inevitable and it's better to rip off the bandaid.

Michigan isn't in this situation because it's evil or untrustworthy, but rather because it's been disorganized and sloppy. There are countless examples just this year of similar decommits that were handled much better, like when Florida commit Isaiah Williams flipped to Washington State in December. Was that a voluntary switch? Not bloody likely. Did it cause a rending of garments and beating of the breast? Not at all.

Michigan took a number of early commits from fringe players, and they did so without checking up on grades. While there have been no complaints from anyone other than Swenson and Weaver, the sheer number of decommits looks bad even if Michigan has valid reasons for consciously uncoupling. There was no reason to take commits from a slew of academically questionable three stars this summer. Michigan gave them a plan to get right and they couldn't get there, which is fine. More or less dropping contact with them is not.

Meanwhile Michigan's two talent-based decommits were given broad hints but not told flat out until they did not want to take those hints. Whether or not this is how it's done elsewhere, that's the equivalent of breaking up with your girlfriend via meaningful eyebrow arcing and the occasional pursed lip. It results in confusion and people buying you gun racks.

Erik Swenson should have been explicitly dumped as soon as he did not show for Michigan's summer camp, and certainly by October, when his midseason senior film arrived in Ann Arbor. Weaver got enough of a message that he started looking around in November; his situation should have been made explicitly clear by midseason at the latest as well.

This is both ethically better and less damaging to the program. A Swenson set loose in October is both more capable of finding an appropriate landing spot and less capable of setting off a media firestorm. If Rashad Weaver simply flips to one of the four schools he visited over the course of the season his decommit is as newsworthy as that of Isaiah Williams, ie, not newsworthy except to Washington State fans.

So. To prevent further outbreaks, pick up the damn phone. By December.

Comments

BILG

January 26th, 2016 at 1:14 PM ^

no morals, no integrity.  My GOD, what have we become?  What happened to doing things the right way?  I will not stand for Harbaugh trying to get the best class possible after miscalculating class size and recruit interest in the program.

I will only be satisfied if we "win the right way," which we have managed to do 1/2 a time over the past half century.  We deserve 9-3 mediocrity and the ability to hold our heads high while getting owned by elite progams like OSU and Alabama, and more recently by regional power MSU.  

First excessive stretching and now this!  UM has clearly sold its soul for wins.  

The Reeve

January 26th, 2016 at 1:14 PM ^

Of course. But the entire matter is absurd because we have only one side of the story. Perhaps Michigan did pick up the phone in all these instances. This is not only possible, but it may even be probable. We are dealing with seasoned professionals here who have a gag order. The only thing that can be asserted at this time is that Michigan was too eager to offer marginal candidates. However, we also don't know if each of those marginal candidates was told things were conditional, and this is a point they neglected their decommitment conversations. I'm not saying that Michigan is without fault here, I'm only saying we have absolutely no idea if they are.

Lanknows

January 26th, 2016 at 1:18 PM ^

They're not going to say anything different when they are allowed to speak on it.

Furthermore, they can say anything they want via 'insiders' like Webb and Spath.  They don't just give those guys info out of the goodness of their hearts, it comes with some expectations that they will help the program out when called upon. When John U. Bacon didn't toe the line he got frozen out.  If Webb were to a write a "these kids got screwed piece" his access would be over.

 

Don

January 26th, 2016 at 2:02 PM ^

Webb has been pretty blunt in saying that both the Swenson and Weaver situations were "regrettable" and that they could have been avoided with more timely and direct communication from Harbaugh and his staff.

That's not saying "these kids got screwed"—and Webb has made it clear he doesn't think that's the case anyhow—but he's made it evident he thinks there's no practical reason to let these situations develop like they have.

It's a matter of communications, and the PR/optics problems they lead to.

 

The Reeve

January 26th, 2016 at 2:32 PM ^

Why is this relevant? The point is, we do not have complete information. Everyone was certain after Swenson decommited that he was given no notice, that at no time in 2015 did anybody convey anything was amiss. That was enough for countless people to excoriate Harbaugh. It turned out not to be true. All I'm saying, to you and to Brian and to everybody else who thinks they know, take a deep breath and wait. Perhaps they never clear the air. Perhaps they do so in some of the subtle ways you described. But I've never seen such an overwhelming example of guilty until proven innocent in my life.




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Reader71

January 26th, 2016 at 3:14 PM ^

You mischaracterize the majority position on Swenson. Few thought he was totally blindsided, as there had been rumors. Most thought that he was never clearly apprised of the situation, that the hints hadn't gotten through to him, that the cold shoulder was a bad method.

The leaks said that the coaches soured on him after he refused to camp and his senior year was wasted on dogging it. That's fine. But the coaches didn't handle that as they should have -- by clearly dropping him after the camp refusal or at some point during his senior season.

Lanknows

January 26th, 2016 at 3:25 PM ^

"Complete information" is something you will never get. 

Swenson or Weaver would have been excusable but both, on top of what we've seen with others like Falcon, on top of the reports about how Stanford recruiting was operated, on top of other decommitments of 3-star type recruits very late in the cycle make it increasingly difficult to argue that sufficient notice was given.  Maybe it was not "no notice" but it was pretty clearly insufficient.  There's not going to be any new information forthcoming that will change that.  Harbaugh can come out TODAY and say "there are certain kids we called EVERY DAY who just wouldn't pick up the phone" but he isn't going to say that because it's not what happened.

It seems that you want to call these kids liars.  Consider applying "innocent until proven guilty" to their version of the events too. Nobody, not even Spath or Webb, is really disputing their version of events - they are just adding to the story.

alum96

January 26th, 2016 at 2:14 PM ^

Wrong.   Dead period just means no face to face contact.  You can talk on the phone, text, etc.

Also Weaver's mom was on twitter last night saying they were just told this week about the changed status of his commitment.  So I guess if we want to accuse a lady who raised a kid who can go to Ivy league schools a liar or someone with an agenda or not bright enough to "read the hints" there are obviously issues in communication here again.

It is strange to me that so many thought he would not be in the class for many weeks and the kid and his mom say the status was changed this week.  Obviously things need to be more explicit because there is a lot of "hint dropping" instead of talking like professional men paid from hundreds of thousands to millions.

schreibee

January 26th, 2016 at 3:06 PM ^

Well 96, we all know what "Coach Harbaugh? I haven't heard from him in months... nor Coach Drevno...nor JayBaugh...nor even gotten a call from Coach Brown since he came on board..." means.

It's just that clearly Enis, Swenson, and Weaver didn't want to hear the silence. So, yes, a direct conversation is imperative moving forward. But if Weaver scheduled visits to other schools 3 months ago but his mother says they didn't "hear" anything until the past week - well somone is doing these kids a disservice, and it's not just Michigan!

Lanknows

January 26th, 2016 at 1:14 PM ^

This is very well put.  None of this is a problem if you make your intentions clear by mid December.  January is too late.

One quibble with the argument is the "kid is better off anyway" argument.  We don't know that. We don't know if Matt Falcon is better off going to Michigan and not playing football than what he chose instead -- but at least he got to choose.  We don't know that Swenson will be better off at Wisconsin (or whatever) or that Weaver will be better of at Temple (or whatever).  Maybe those kids are better off warming the bench and getting a Michigan degree for their butt's troubles than actually playing football at Not-Michigan. Maybe they wouldn't have sat the bench.  We don't know, and they didn't get a say in the matter. 

In other words, it still sucks to cut a kid - any kid - that you previously offered a scholarship too (to play football AND go to school for free). Most of us can live with cutting a kid, but it still sucks and that should be recognized, instead of the cold "he's better off anyways."  It'd be nice if the kid had the choice. 

Again it goes back to communication.  Have the "I don't think you will play here" conversation and 9 times out of 10 the kid will agree with the "better off" option and look around, if he has time.

 

kevin holt

January 26th, 2016 at 1:34 PM ^

But the 1 out of 10 who decides to stay at Michigan should not be allowed to take a roster spot when the coaches just don't think he can play. Maybe we could offer them an academic scholarship or something, or a PWO, but allowing them to take up a 4-year scholarship based on feelings is not great.

Lanknows

January 26th, 2016 at 1:40 PM ^

"Allowing" a kid who you offered a scholarship to to take the scholarship seems like the right thing to do. Recruiting is inherently "based on feelings". We can debate about ethics in modern college recruiting all day, but if the coaches offer a kid who they think can play (presumably) and then they change their mind they are going back on their word.  Where I'm from (earth) that is called a lie at worst and a mistake at best.  Neither is good. Neither is unavoidable.

champswest

January 26th, 2016 at 3:15 PM ^

That phrase that Brian keeps using, "The kid will be fine and he is probably better off elsewhere" just kind of rubs me the wrong way. How does anyone know he will be better off or be just fine. Maybe he just got his dreams crushed at the last minute.

Also, I can't help but wonder how many of these recent decommitts would have still been considered good enough to play at Michigan if someone better hadn't come along.

DancingWolverine

January 26th, 2016 at 1:15 PM ^

I'm a bit confused on what's considered "over-offering".  To the best of my ability to figure it out, this year Indiana offered 71 players, Northwestern offered 117, MSU offered 178, OSU offered 181, Michigan offered 232, and Nebraska offered 277. For comparison, Alabama offered 263.  Hasn't every single school listed over-offered?

What is the difference between over-offering and avoiding bad press, besides the amount of interest that the players give back to the school?

alum96

January 26th, 2016 at 2:18 PM ^

Commitable vs non commitable offers.

Teams piss out offers like hotcakes nowadays.  Only so many can actually be executed in any time frame, per the coach's discretion.

Look at Pie Young - he has an offer from UM, Bama, FSU.  Brian has stated many time he doubts Bama or FSU would accept an offer from him at this point as they have higher level recruits they are going after.  Much the same Michigan is making him wait (reading between the line) to NSD as he wants to be in the class as they determine if there is room.  But he has an offer, but it is not commitable at this time.

Offer and OFFER are two different things nowadays.  Which is why just looking at a guys offer sheet nowadays is also misleading.  Bama is not really interesting in 200+ kids as of Jan 2016; either is Michigan.

 

champswest

January 26th, 2016 at 3:21 PM ^

"Why does Ace or Brian bother listing the other schools that the kid holds offers from, when they write a offer or hello post? Why do we care about other offers if they are a dime a dozen and may not even be committable?

Come to think about it, why do we even care about offers and commits since none of it means anything until signing day?

JeepinBen

January 26th, 2016 at 1:16 PM ^

I'd be surprised if Harbaugh doesn't address this on signing day. Something to the extent of "we had miscommunications in the past and we will rectify that in the future"

Blue_In_Texas

January 26th, 2016 at 1:16 PM ^

 

Hopefully the staff learns from this, and hopefully once this week of recruiting continues to ramp up it drowns out all this, we continue gaining momentum in recruiting, and rip out the hearts and souls of our fuckboy rivals for years to come, regaining our rightful place at the top of college football :D. 

 

Also, Mork is such a pussy for deleting his subtweet. How much real estate we must occupy in his brain..

wayneandgarth

January 26th, 2016 at 1:16 PM ^

Brian - you are "paid" to have an opinion and I'm glad you are expressing it.  But, do you feel that you have enough of the facts from the Michigan point of view on what transpired with these recruits?

kehnonymous

January 26th, 2016 at 1:25 PM ^

Brian doesn't have inside information on Michigan's POV and even if he did, he can't really comment publically without far worse implications.

All that is irrelevant.  The simple truth is that the optics here are bad and in terms of controlling the narrative, Michigan and Harbaugh just didn't execute.  That's on M as an institution and is absolutely worthy of critique no matter how much you may or may not know about the behind-the-scenes chatter.

HHW

January 26th, 2016 at 1:17 PM ^

This surprises me. We hammer Greenstein and others for making decisions based on one side of the story. Now our leader has decided to do the same. Could it be that the recruits in question just aren't being 100% forthright with their explanations or maybe they just didn't want to believe the info JH was giving them in the fall, but had to in January.
It may look bad, but it's not going to hurt recruiting if M is successful in the field. 3 star offers will be the exception not the rule.
Just look at 'Bama.
I look forward to the other side of the story after signing day.




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

DM2009

January 26th, 2016 at 1:18 PM ^

Have you ever applied to a job and not heard anything for weeks or months? While the message is pretty clear, it's much better to get a firm no from a job than no communication. This is what Harbaugh needs to do. I agree basically 100% with Brian here.

UMProud

January 26th, 2016 at 1:19 PM ^

Man I'm going to be glad when all this is in the rear view mirror.

 

That being said I think what we're seeing is organized chaos with Harbaugh putting superhuman effort into retooling this program as fast as possible. 

MGoUP

January 26th, 2016 at 1:19 PM ^

Pick up the damn phone as well recruits.  You don't hear from the coaches much over the last few months and you just sit around?  

True Blue Grit

January 26th, 2016 at 1:20 PM ^

1.  Do a much better job communicating with recruits - earlier is better.

2.  Don't make so many offers to low-rated players in the summer.  As we found out, a bunch of them may accept them.  I realize the staff may be trying to find "diamonds in the rough" with this mass-offer approach.  But, as it appears, it's harder to manage.  

I am in agreement with Erik in Dayton that it's possible Harbaugh came in with his Stanford recruiting strategy circa 8 years ago, and hasn't realized until lately that times have changed.  Hopefully, we'll see a better organized approach going forward.

Blue Durham

January 26th, 2016 at 1:20 PM ^

opinion about this; mainly that ceasing to communicate with a recruit they have "cooled" on just isn't a good approach, and for someone (Harbaugh) who is such a direct, stand-up guy, surprising.

I understand that it is hoped that the recruit will get the message and decommit, thus removing a minor PR problem in the fall. But they risk having a bigger problem in January if the undesired recruit does not follow suit.

But is this just being sloppy or is it keeping a crack in the door open for insurance sake, just in case the staff really does need that fall-back recruit? It probably doesn't matter much since the end result is the same.