Quinn Nordin Tidbit, Didn't See this Posted
Sorry, the tidbit comes from a Freep story today. I'll include the link, but click with full awareness where you will be going...
Here is the tidbit:
"Nordin changing: After Harbaugh's grand gesture to Nordin with the sleepover and driving him to Ann Arbor for the official visit, the Penn State commit continues to play the field. While Baylor was in the mix and was to have an in-home with Nordin last Thursday, the Bears may be on the outside now as Scout.com reported USC will be Nordin's final official visit, not Baylor. Why? Because USC now has John Baxter as its special teams coach, the assistant who spent most of the last year recruiting Nordin while Baxter was at Michigan."
So it sounds like losing Baxter could hurt us here, and I always get nervous competing with USC, even if they are in turmoil...
http://www.freep.com/story/sports/college/university-michigan/wolverine…
January 19th, 2016 at 10:49 AM ^
Will Jim give him rides to the airport too?
January 19th, 2016 at 11:11 AM ^
January 19th, 2016 at 12:08 PM ^
hop in the car with the daily writer who stalked him at the airport?
January 19th, 2016 at 12:34 PM ^
January 20th, 2016 at 7:39 PM ^
I'm going to tell my grandkids about you!
January 19th, 2016 at 10:52 AM ^
'Nother tidbit (non-Nordin) - As an update to the "Potential Shakeup on OT Recruiting Board?" thread yesterday, Steve Wiltfong said today that he does not expect Erik Swenson to be in the class.
January 19th, 2016 at 10:55 AM ^
Who stays committed for somewhere for almost two years, then switches with two weeks left? Just damned odd...
January 19th, 2016 at 11:00 AM ^
Rivals is indicating this development is from Michigan's end, not Swenson's.
January 19th, 2016 at 11:04 AM ^
that bothers me. Dude was a true blue. It kinda annoys me that we recruit players early to get them to commit so we are essentially given teh option later to keep them based on development. Kid is still talented
January 19th, 2016 at 11:07 AM ^
In some cases I would agree but not in this one. The guy was offered by Hoke way before anyone truly knew whether he would pan out. If he can't play then he can't play. If you'd prefer that method of honoring guys' scholarships who aren't good enough to play in the Big Ten then don't complain when we aren't winning Big Ten championships. Besides, maybe it's better for him to go to a place where he can play rather than spend 4 years on the bench.
January 19th, 2016 at 11:15 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 19th, 2016 at 11:33 AM ^
I'm just curious as to whatyou think that means?
I mean I'm my moms favorite guy. Doesn't mean I'm Jennifer Anistons favorite guy.
I mean MaxPreps, Rivals, Scout, etc. doesnt mean shit. I thought we have proved this numerous times... Blake Bars was a 4 star. WIl Campbell was a 5 star... it is just never ending. Why would you want the staff to take a kid they don't want? Because you have some strange fondness for a kid because he committed a long time ago to a completely different set of coaches and is "true blue."
He's just a kid. He is still going to get to go to a great school to play football. It's best for him and us if that school isn't Michigan. So what's the problem?
January 19th, 2016 at 12:44 PM ^
January 19th, 2016 at 2:02 PM ^
As you pointed it out we don't know the details so what it looks like and what it is may be two different things.
Do we storm Schembechler Hall because it looks bad?
January 19th, 2016 at 2:51 PM ^
January 19th, 2016 at 5:02 PM ^
Yes no one on this site ever exagerates. Everyone engages in rational and dispationate discourse at all times.
January 19th, 2016 at 5:04 PM ^
I think most adults would wait for all the facts to come out before even engaging in baseless specualtion.
January 19th, 2016 at 11:17 AM ^
when winning doesn't happen?
Football is to college as bull fighting is to agriculture. I didn't make that up.
Players commit to coaches. When a coaching change happens depth charts and recruiting boards reset.
If a player wants to play for the new coach he has to make that good. Not the other way around. If communication was not done here that is on Harbaugh. If Swenson wants to play here and doesn't that is on Swenson.
Commiting to a school is not winning a lottery. It's a work for school deal contingent on the approval of the head coach.
January 19th, 2016 at 11:25 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 19th, 2016 at 11:45 AM ^
That is the issue.
I was surprised as anyone when Kyle Bosch was turned away. No one seems to feel too bad about that. Harbaugh was clear with him. There is nothing here that says Harbaugh was not clear to Swenson.
Nobody takes a commit that early without reservation. Swenson was Hoke's commit. You need to know the detail.
You will never know the detail.
Time to sit back and go hmmm.... nothing more.
January 19th, 2016 at 12:12 PM ^
Graham Glasgow, on the other hand, accepted the terms and lived with his grandma for his 5th year.
No idea what the terms were re Swenson, and I have no basis on which to speculate.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 19th, 2016 at 11:04 PM ^
terms he was unwilling to accept. That sounds like turning away to me but it also sounds like you know more about the details.
Glasgow was coming from a walk-on role and personal issues - but never left the team. Bosch was a rare true freshman who played on the line and a scholarship player who left for personal reasons. If they were offered the same terms they weren't equal. I don't know what Bosch was told when he left by Hoke but Harbaugh did not communicate with him until he came back.
It didn't seem fishy to me that Harbaugh did what he did. There was a line and Bosch couldn't toe it. I appreciate your insight in anycase. Harbaugh's deal to Bosch seemed straight up IMO.
January 19th, 2016 at 11:07 AM ^
And it's my belief that most things that are best for the Michigan football program are best for Michigan. However, this does not sit well with me at all. Swenson committed and stayed committed through everything. He was absolutely 100% loyal. Harbaugh re-affirmed his scholarship and was glad to have him on board when the class wasn't filling up.
Now it's two weeks before signing day, and suddenly he hasn't been progressing enough to be a part of the class. Maybe he knew a little while ago, but that isn't much time either. This doesn't sit well with me. This may be best for the Michigan football program for the short term, but this isn't what is best for Michigan. Loyalty, in my eyes, still means something, and while I understand some of the guys getting pushed out, Swenson doesn't sit right.
So yeah, I'm not on board with this from Harbaugh if true. It doesn't sit well to me at all. But about all that means is this post on this board, so it's whatever. Still don't like it though
January 19th, 2016 at 11:14 AM ^
From the Michigan staff if it's true. If they didn't want him in the class, why wait this long to cut him loose? He's been a hard commit for over 2 years and he has (had?) a pretty good offer sheet.
This is one of those situations that I think you take the kid even if he wasn't what you expected him to be. Loyalty should count for something.
January 19th, 2016 at 11:16 AM ^
And don't get me wrong, there are always reason to rescind scholarships (grades, off field issues, etc), but a guy not developing at your expectations when you had the choice to offer him a scholarship early or not (or rescind it earlier when he wasn't developing as you expected) is part of the risk/reward in recruiting.
This guy was loyal through all of that, loyal when Hoke (his coach) was fired, loyal when Michigan had no coach, and loyal once Harbaugh was hired. It was Harbaugh's choice to stick with him at the time, and he did. He still should now.
January 19th, 2016 at 12:03 PM ^
How do you know what has gone on behind the scenes? Most of what we see and hear about recruiting is hush-hush, speculation or a leaked tidbit of info that we dissect into little pieces. Maybe I'm naive but you can only mistreat recruits for so long before you get a reputation among high school coaches that makes life very difficult.
Harbaugh has to know the rules of the road with recruiting which is why I'd be surprised if he doesn't treat kids fair and square.
January 19th, 2016 at 12:44 PM ^
but told him based on his development he was unlikely to contribute at Michigan? I don't know if that happened or not but would you be okay with that? Either way this should have happened no later than December to give him time to take officials and figure out his options.
January 19th, 2016 at 12:53 PM ^
Without knowing facts, it is impossible to speculate, but it would seem that a recruit should be able to look at a current roster as well as other recruits that have given oral committments and at least get close to reading the tea leaves.
Aren't there a host of contingencies when a possible recruit is offered? Does anyone have a copy of an offer that a Michigan recruit receives or a link to an offer?
January 19th, 2016 at 11:22 AM ^
Agreed.
January 19th, 2016 at 11:26 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 19th, 2016 at 11:35 AM ^
Loyalty is why you all hated RR and Hoke BTW...
January 19th, 2016 at 11:53 AM ^
I hated RR because he lost so Goddamn always. Loyalty had nothing to do with it..
January 19th, 2016 at 12:06 PM ^
So you hated RR for losing and you like Harbaugh for winning, but think Harbaugh should be loyal to Hoke's recruit? I am so confused.
We are unlikely to get a clear explanation from Eric and Harbaugh if Eric is not part of this class. We can speculate all we want, but isn't it counterintuitive to suggest that we need to be loyal to another staff's wishes and also demand that we win?
January 19th, 2016 at 12:16 PM ^
If Harbaugh didn't want him in the class he should have cut him loose a lot damn sooner than 2 weeks before signing day. He had a ND offer (and several other P5 offers), but this close to signing day he could end up at a MAC school.
That said, it would be nice to hear both sides of the story. Coaches should be able to talk about this stuff publically and defend themselves.
January 19th, 2016 at 12:38 PM ^
We likely agree on some points. I'm willing to wait and see how this all shakes out.
January 19th, 2016 at 12:51 PM ^
we will have to hold on to our beliefs in Harbaugh prior to this development. it's really that simple for me at this point. I will deal with it later if his actions contradict my current beliefs.
What else can we do until proven otherwise?
January 19th, 2016 at 12:13 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 19th, 2016 at 2:27 PM ^
This guy has been a long time commit and it's just not time to just cut him loose. i hope he can stay with the program. Maybe this is just the ugly side of recruiting and I don't know all the stuff going on in the background. But this just does not seem right to me.
January 19th, 2016 at 11:41 AM ^
I'm having a hard time reading your post, I think my browser or the mgoservers are having issues. I don't see any reference to porn or drugs, what gives??
Anyway, the part of the message that is showing up I agree with.
January 19th, 2016 at 5:24 PM ^
it is similar to Pipkins - to any transaction - if you aren't in the room ... you don't know.
The second year of a new coach is a critical class. A coach gets his players. Swenson needs to make this good if he feels he has been slighted. There are plenty of CFB programs that will give him that chance.
There is no dishonor in deals done in the open. Sometimes there is honor in deals done in private. There is always revenge.
If more comes out on this I will change my opinion accordingly. For now... it's crunch time.
January 19th, 2016 at 11:44 AM ^
This is a big problem I have with following recruiting too closely. I am guessing we will never know the full story because Michigan can't (and probably wouldn't anyway) comment, and the recruit probably doesn't want to talk about it. There is so much unknown here, and a lot of assumptions being made.
Does anyone know for certain that his scholarship got pulled? Is it possible that the coaching staff could have told him that his scholarship would be honored, but he would probably never see the field at Michigan and may want to pursue other options if playing football was important to him? This is a conversation that I think happens all the time with players in postseason exit interviews. I would never want to see Michigan pull a scholarship offer from a kid, but at the same time, wouldn't the coaches be doing him a disservice if they weren't completely honest with him? I would think it would be better for both parties to be honest with each other now rather than have someone come into the program and have to transfer after a year or two because they avoided being upfront with each other. Isn't the best situation for both parties here to offer to honor the scholarship if he wants Michigan but be truthful about his prospects for his football career here? And how do we know that isn't the scenario that is playing out right now?
January 19th, 2016 at 11:49 AM ^
I would upvote you a thousand times if I could.
January 19th, 2016 at 11:47 AM ^
and will probably get negged for not having the same opinion as everyone else, but here it is anyways.
I don't understand why people are up in arms about this? There has to be something that Harbaugh and Co. know that we do not. Top 100 football players just don't fall out of the sky and into our laps, so I imagine there has to be a good reason behind this. To stop recruiting a high school All-American out of nowhere just doesn't make sense. Guess we will see....
BUT, what's wrong with evalutating continued performance on the football field before honoring a player's pledge to the University? If I'm not giving my best effort in the classroom and I get my college scholarship revoked because of it, who's fault is that? In the same way, if I'm not giving my best effort on the field or have not developed into the type of player a certain team needs, why should I still be given a scholarship? I agree that the timing of this whole thing is suspect, and if Harbaugh didn't want him, then he should have let the kid know sooner, no argument there. But acting like anybody is owed something because at one time "it was offered to them" is ridiculous. That's not how the real world works, and we shouldn't be surprised that it's not how college athletics works. I feel for the kid, I'm not some heartless guy, I'm a high school counselor, I deal with kids feelings all the time. Sometimes we just aren't good enough and that's ok. I got cut from the basketball team in high school, I graduated from U of M and got a Master's degree, it all works out.
However, I'm reserving final judgement until all the facts are laid out on the table. You can bet that Swenson's camp will have something to say if this alleged situation is true...I just can't wrap my mind around dropping an elite recruit for no reason....
January 19th, 2016 at 11:58 AM ^
is mainly the date. It's almost signing day FFS. If he wasn't wanted in the class, he should have been told that a long time ago so he could make other plans. He had a bunch of other P5 offers, including ND.
January 19th, 2016 at 11:04 AM ^
The other thread discussing potential Offensive Tackle recruiting changes makes it pretty clear that Michigan has done the 'ghosting' thing with Swenson because they feel he hasn't improved much since his initial committment and they feel they can get a better player instead.
January 19th, 2016 at 11:04 AM ^
Who are they gonna get that's better this late into the cycle?
January 19th, 2016 at 11:11 AM ^
at the time he committed, but it appears the approach Harbaugh & staff may be taking is that scholarship offers on NSD are contingent on continued performance on the field. If a player fails to develop as expected, the offer may be rescinded. Of course all this is speculation. None of us know what the current staff has told Swenson of late or not told him.
January 19th, 2016 at 11:20 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 19th, 2016 at 11:48 AM ^
January 19th, 2016 at 10:56 AM ^
Isn't this the third thread you've posted this in?