Shaun Crawford Officially Decommits

Submitted by rb4kb8 on
It's all over the Twitterverse.

Isn't recruiting a blast? Everyday I realize there's so much better stuff I can waste my time on.

It's not about Crawford. My frustration is the process and the 'again' feeling.

Good luck to the young man.

BlueCube

May 24th, 2014 at 8:44 AM ^

he may be looking at competition for playing time. Michigan is going to be very deep even without him.

He knows Jabrill Peppers is going to be here.

He is from Ohio and heard about Tyree Kinnel winning MVP at the Columbus RCS .

He knows Garrett Taylor recently committed.

If he wants to play quickly, he may be looking at this and saying it may not be that easy. I haven't looked to see how these other schools compare to Michigan. I look at Michigan and say we have a good chance at a shut down backfield. Maybe it's a conincidence that this is happened shortly after this news but maybe it isn't.

This also doesn't really change anything. Michigan's position is if you go on visits, you are not committed. In reality, despite his comment a couple days ago that he was still a Michigan committ, in Michigan's eyes he wasn't unless he cancelled his other visits. He may or may not end up here but this changes nothing from a week ago.

I hope he comes back because the more talent the better but not all of these players are going to get immediate playiing time.

93Grad

May 24th, 2014 at 9:01 AM ^

At least as far as the Michigan coaches were concerned, and rightly so. Crawford saying it was just a technicality. The real question is whether he ends up in the class anyway. That remains to be seen, but I will say that he is certainly not the highest ranked target on our board nor is he at a position of great need. That is not sour grapes but reality. DE, TE, RB and OT recruiting are far more important to this class. We look good at the first 2 positions and still have nice options on the later 2.

YoOoBoMoLloRoHo

May 24th, 2014 at 9:29 AM ^

We seemed over recruited at CB with 2 in such a small class and a roster full of CBs. Perhaps GMatt wants extra CBs to deal with 3-4 receiver sets and Hoke wants more speed for Special Teams.

Nice to have him in the class, but we clearly need a few other positions bolstered more.

MGoStrength

May 24th, 2014 at 9:32 AM ^

As much as I like this kid and think he's talented, it's not that big of a deal IMO.  There was a time in 2012 and 2013 where I thought every recruit was desperately important.  UMs talent just was not what it had been and they were really behind some other teams in the league, mainly OSU.  Now, I don't see talent as a problem.  It's development and youth.  With so many good young DBs already on the team and guys like Taylor already committed, this is not a big deal.  It would be one thing it is was a pass rusing WDE, but DB...UM is deep and young.  I hope he comes back, but if not so be it.  It really is his loss if he choses ND.

bronxblue

May 24th, 2014 at 10:03 AM ^

Meh.  I'll care around signing day.  Wish him luck if he goes somewhere else, but at this point I'm not going to get too worked up over a kid looking around.  Just wished he hadn't committed initially if he wasn't 100% sure about sticking around because all it does is create undue stress for everyone.

kzooblue2016

May 24th, 2014 at 10:04 AM ^

Would like to see Crawford here, seems like a great player. However, like others mentioned, it seems like we'll be ok at CB. What's worse is how bad the decomittments look: Campbell, Harris, now crawford. It's not a good vibe.

carlos spicywiener

May 24th, 2014 at 10:38 AM ^

Crawford was wanted by the coaches for a reason, all you sour-grapes folks in this thread should realize that. Wanted, as in, a priority, 1st-pick recruit and offer.

HIs ability to be a tiny linebacker in the secondary, with quick change of direction and lateral movement, and run with the ever-growing pile of Buckeye slot ninjas would've been a real asset. Think Tyrann Mathieu in the maize and blue.

The coaches don't just offer 5'9 DBs out of laziness...Crawford is a great spread DB prospect. I hope he takes a David Dawson-like sabbatical and returns to the class.

In reply to by SECcashnassadvantage

carlos spicywiener

May 24th, 2014 at 11:35 AM ^

Peppers is only 1 guy, he will be be tasked with playing field corner. Crawford will be in the slot. Two different roles...

Some of you people act like Peppers will be in 5 places on the field at once...

Hokemadness27

May 24th, 2014 at 12:13 PM ^

You act like we have no one else back there? Countess, Taylor, Lewis, stribling, peppers, Taylor, and kinnel? Those ring a bell? Crawford is good and there was a reason the coaches wanted him. You also need to realize that we actually have depth in the secondary unlike our D line. This would be much worse of

carlos spicywiener

May 24th, 2014 at 12:22 PM ^

Of course we have guys back there. But with an eye on being elite, we want to stock the cupboards with good talent every recruiting cycle.

People here are acting like we're better off without a 5'9 DB, but I think Crawfords skillset would be a huge asset against spread teams.

name redacted

May 25th, 2014 at 12:20 AM ^

Wait, is Crawford like, a double-man?? Is he, unlike peppers, more than 1 guy?!



No. Your same logic that peppers is just one dude and can only make so much of a difference applies to Crawford as well. We're fine. Our backfield looks great, ask Crawford, it's why he's not coming. I would rather guys who weren't afraid of competition (how ya like that big assumption).

shallowcal

May 24th, 2014 at 10:46 AM ^

nailed it.  so much depth at the position.  plus crawford is super undersized.  with kinnel and taylor coming in this class at db and the solid young core we are trotting out there now, this decommit is not all that worrisome.  i think this says more about what crawford thinks his ability is(and drop in rankings) and how early he will be able to play (if at all).

UofM626

May 24th, 2014 at 10:49 AM ^

Every time I look and think were moving forward we loose another player and he DeCommits. Hope that Crawford, Harris and Campbell change there mind and come back but at this point I would take 1 of the 3 DeCommits back and be happy.

chatster

May 24th, 2014 at 12:34 PM ^

Disappointed, but not devastated. There's still lots of time to upgrade Michigan's 2015 recruiting class. Just wondering. Commitment or de-commitment -- Who's Next?

Danwillhor

May 24th, 2014 at 3:39 PM ^

with what I'm about to say but for the millionth time since last year: I WISH I COULD TALK CFB WITHOUT KNOWING ANYTHING ABOUT RECRUITING LIKE THE GOOD OLD DAYS.....LIKE EARLY 2000s. It's a joke and I don't care. I wish I never knew who Hand ,Crawford, Harris, Campbell, etc were before they go to UM or not. Why? In today's age I'm constantly watching games or the NFL draft thinking "he was once a UM commit/heavy lean" and the like. I want to to able to talk CFB but not know our players until the first game every year like a little more than a decade ago. Problem? Impossible now. Recruiting today has me jaded. I don't care that Crawford decommits, I'd rather have just not known who he was in the first place. He ends up here, great. If not, best to him. I wish this site had a recruiting forum so I could come on here and avoids it while taking UM & CFB.

Perkis-Size Me

May 24th, 2014 at 3:51 PM ^

Wish him the best wherever he ends up, but if it ultimately proves to be the case that he doesn't want to be here, then we don't need him. Bring guys into the fold that want to be here. Next man up.



Not meaning to criticize Crawford, but I'm just speaking generally. He's a 17 year old kid that has to make a big decision. He's entitled to take a look around at his options.

Wolfman

May 25th, 2014 at 12:19 AM ^

These kids are all over the map when the offers start rolling in.  I think BH really has to change his stance on "If you commit, you don't visit."  I guess that woud be fair if the kid were agle to say, "I'll guarantee I stay committed if I see constant improvement on the field from the time I do commit."  Such has not been the case. As contracts normally ask for a price for service or service for service, etc., it is not fair, imo, to ask a kid to make that five year commitment until we can guarantee him the likelihood of a couple of BCS bowls during that time frame which a school like Michigan should easily do. Of course, such cannot be stated but on field performance over a substantial period of time will serve just as well.                                        ^Fortunately this is an area that somehow we have been able to stockpile a wealth of talent that should maintain us for years to come.  However, it is losing game changing DEs and not coaching up our offensive talent that has really made these kids decide that Michigan just might not be the Michigan of yesterday.  Don't blame them at all. As RR used to say, "We'll win when we deserve to win," and we'll nail these recruits when we deserve a reasonable likelihood of them honoring their commitment virtue of play on field. It's always been that way and won't change soon.       I say good luck young man.