Thomas Rawls Eligible?

Submitted by mgorecruit on

Thomas Rawls will announce his decision on the 31st of January, it's between UM and CMU, although he doesn't have a Michigan offer yet.

That might change next weekend when he takes his official visit to Ann Arbor. Rawls has refused to reveal his new ACT score, because he wants to surprise people on the 31st. I think he'll inform the coaches next weekend that he has qualified, and then he'll get the offer that Fred Jackson has been DYING to give him.

Then of course he'll accept and become part of our class, and I for one would be thrilled. If you haven't seen his senior highlights, shame on you. Link below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoMqyUufmmI

Bob Probert Owns You

January 22nd, 2011 at 2:29 AM ^

Could turn into an absolute beast with a redshirt and a year on the bench (two years of S&C)... if he improves his foot speed and pad level, he will be a load to deal with.

Fred Jackson would likely describe him as possessing Tyrone Wheatley's strength, Justin Fargas' speed, and Chris Perry's hands -- with the chance to turn into a Marshall Faulk-type all-purpose back. 

Maize and Blue…

January 22nd, 2011 at 6:09 AM ^

He doesn't need to RS.  This was only his second year playing RB as he started as a LB in his sophomore and still played there this year.  He went to Flint Northern not SW and had very little talent around him especially on his Oline yet he put up monster numbers including a 396 yard performance to break Mark  Ingram's city record for rushing yards in a game (actually broke his own since he broke Ingrams the week before).

He missed 2+ games with a high ankle sprain or would have been the leading rusher in the state.  The game the sprain occurred he was near 200 yards in the first half before the injury. FWIW his coach is Fred Jackson's son.

Captain Obvious

January 22nd, 2011 at 1:51 AM ^

again, because we have room and need RBs.

However, I have not understood the incredible amount of hype he has gotten on here.  (Yes, the hype long pre-dated the RR firing and persisted while we had the best RB in the country locked up, so the answer cannot be "he'd be great in Hoke's system).  Can someone explain this?    He is the 77th RB to Scout and a 5.6 rating on rivals.  He has great size for a RB, so that's not artifically depressing his rankings.

CMU is the only other school going after him.  What gives?  It can't JUST be grades - grades don't play the biggest role in recruiting rankings and schools tend to continue to pursue good players that are borderline.  It has to be the case that a ton of schools have taken a look and were not interested.

Magnus

January 22nd, 2011 at 2:01 AM ^

He's in Michigan's backyard, breaking lots of records, and playing for Fred Jackson's son. 

Sometimes that's all Michigan fans need to get excited.

That being said, I agree with you.  I don't necessarily agree with the Sam Webb hype machine, but if Hoke intends to go back to I-formations and power football, I think Rawls would be a good dude to have on the roster.  But with Denard on the roster and (presumably) spreading the field a little bit, Hopkins and Rawls are probably less important on this team until Denard graduates.

m1jjb00

January 22nd, 2011 at 10:44 AM ^

It's true that DRob will take some straight rushing attempts from the backfield.  But, if part of the design is to get Denard on the edge (either straight run, rollout or run-pass option) then having a guy who can burst straight through the middle and can plow through some arm tackles seems to me to be a very effective complement.  As a complement it would even take away some edge D and make Denard more effective on the margin. 

FWIW, I'm less down on Michael Shaw than others.

mackbru

January 22nd, 2011 at 2:07 AM ^

So, again, why wouldn't any other major school be at least sniffing around the kid? Teams routinely hover around good prospects with iffy grades.

TRUEwolverine

January 22nd, 2011 at 3:06 AM ^

Cannot WAIT for the TRawler to make it to AA. This guy is clearly a monster and could potentially contend this coming season for PT against Cox, Toussaint, and Hopkins. Very excited for our squads future...

FliCityFinest

January 22nd, 2011 at 3:46 AM ^

I know a lot about him, Iowa and Wisconsin said they will offer with a qualifying score, Bobby Williams(former MSU coach) has been in contact with him regarding Alabama recruitment but told Thomas no room in this year class, Cincinnati and Toledo offered him early, but he always maintained Michigan is his dream school Schools just haven't been pushing for him because its so late in the process, but I can tell you one thing, the kid is an absolute beast on the field

george11

January 22nd, 2011 at 6:58 AM ^

If Fred Jackson is interested and thinks this kid has talent then Michigan would be crazy not to take him if he is eligible.  Fred has been known to bring in one or two good RBs.

cypress

January 22nd, 2011 at 7:37 AM ^

I'm sure I'll get negged for this since my opinion is not in the majority, but I really dont like taking another RB in this class. If you believe the rumors that Gallon will be moved to RB, that will give us 8 and only one is a senior. Thats fine if you have unlimited scholarships, but when you have that many guys at one position, it usually means you are thin at another..and we definitely are in a few positions. We have 20 scholarships to give, and as of now 15 for next year. I'm sure that number will stretch to 18 or so, but regardless...these both will be smaller classes. Right now we have 10 firm commits, 2 soft commits, and a TON of guys popping up that we have a legitimate shots at. Flowers, Barnett, Bryant, Alexander, Isaaka, Willingham, Poole, Clark, McClure, Taylor, Raven, Wiles. And thats not even including whichever surprise QB and DT's we will be chasing. I just think we definitely have greater needs than another RB. Especially one with grade issues.

I too, fear that Rawls hype is a result of him putting up huge numbers in our state. I watched his film, he's good, but I'm not so sure he's elite. And it still seems odd to me that he only has a couple of MAC offers and is rated so low. Usually academics dont totally kill someones ratings and offers. I believe the offers are conditional based on qualifying. The whole thing just doesnt add up.

 

 

teldar

January 22nd, 2011 at 9:13 AM ^

However. There are people saying he looks like M Hart, but a little bigger and faster. You'll remember M Hart was not a highly regarded prospect and  that Michigan was one of the few schools who recruited him. If we can get someone like Hart, but with a little more size and speed, I say he sounds great. If Rawls knows how to run forward and just doesn't stop, that's something that not all RB's ever learn. 

He sounds like a good risk.

Webber's Pimp

January 22nd, 2011 at 7:40 AM ^

Nevermind the gurus and star ranking. Thomas Rawls is a tremendously important a recruit. By all accounts he is an animal running the ball. We need to shore up our RB situation. Dee is off the board but Rawls is very nice consolation prize if we can land him.

cypress

January 22nd, 2011 at 7:57 AM ^

So we need 9 RBs then? Most teams have about 5 on scholarship. We're so thin at other areas, I just dont see the desperate need to "shore up our RBs" like I've heard a lot of people say. Yes, I know our RBs werent amazing last year..but who is to say that Rawls will be? I think RB is already crowded. We have 3 years of Hopkins as our brusier, Cox is a bigger back, plus we have Fitz, Hayes, Smith, Shaw...I just cant understand why people act like Rawls should be such a priority.

This whole thing seems like his local hype has eclipsed what he really is. I still find it very odd that he is ranked so low and has such pedrestrian offers, and having it explained as his ACT score. Theres been a ton of top prospects over the years who have gotten offers from every school in the country before they had a qualifying ACT score. Its conditional. MSU...who LOVES big physical backs..didnt feel he was worthy of an offer? This whole thing just confuses me.

Magnus

January 22nd, 2011 at 8:12 AM ^

I have a feeling that Borges' offense is going to use two backs more frequently.  As we don't have any scholarship fullbacks on our roster and don't seem to be recruiting any, it's quite possible that our blocking back/second back in the backfield will be a guy like Hopkins (or Rawls).  Remember that last year's SDSU offense used two tailback-type guys at the same time, and when Borges was at Auburn, he often used Ronnie Brown and Cadillac Williams in the same backfield.

I agree with your assessment of Rawls' scholarship situation.  I don't think he's the super awesome back that Sam Webb and many on here are talking about.  However, I think he represents the Big Ten-style back that Brady Hoke probably wants to use while he's here at Michigan.  And when one is in your backyard and you've got 10 additional scholarships to give out in about the next 10 days...hey, why not?

cypress

January 22nd, 2011 at 8:17 AM ^

Yeah I think a lot of people just watch a You Tube clip and think he's unbelievable. His rankings cant be just because of his ACT. That just doesnt make sense. If a Sparty fan tried to say this about one of their recruits, we'd all laugh him off as a slappy. I still dont like taking another RB (we could target 1 elite back next year), when we have more pressing needs elsewhere, but whatever.

Magnus

January 22nd, 2011 at 8:23 AM ^

I think you should aim to take at least one running back every year.  And since it's unclear where Justice Hayes is destined to play, maybe Rawls isn't a bad idea.

You can still aim for an elite back in 2012, with the idea that Shaw will be graduated, Smith will be a senior, and Cox will be a redshirt senior (if he sticks around for a fifth year).

artds

January 22nd, 2011 at 7:57 AM ^

Is this business about Rawls holding his ACT score and deciding on the 31st actually what is happening, or just the OP's fantasy of what could happen?

I'm confused since no link or source was provided yet eveyone in the thread is all excited about the content of the OP's post.

buckeyeh8er

January 22nd, 2011 at 8:06 AM ^

If he would be open to playing FB and adding another 10+lbs, this would let him block for his boy Hayes and would get him some carries early in his career.  Just dont want to see a talent like him have to wait a while to get on the field.

Blue boy johnson

January 22nd, 2011 at 9:15 AM ^

I don't know the difference between a long strider and a short strider but this kid must be a short strider. Looks like he takes real tiny steps to me but nobody was catching him. Rawls isn't flashy, but as some have pointed out, he does go forward. He uses subtle cuts instead of exaggerated "shakes"

Some of you probably don't know this, so I will inform you. Mike Hart was a 3* also.

Njia

January 22nd, 2011 at 9:32 AM ^

Rawls recorded a single in the 70s called "You'll Never Find Another Back Like Mine". One of his biggest hits was, "Maize-y Love". Great U(-M)rban soul.

True story.

This is Thomas appearing under his stage name, Lou:

Don

January 22nd, 2011 at 9:33 AM ^

It may be crowded with bodies, but it's virtually vacant when it comes to RBs who have proven that they can be difference-makers. Either they can't stay healthy or fumble in crucial situations. The only exceptions I would make is for Hopkins and maybe Cox, since for whatever reason the former coaching staff was inclined to keep them on the bench. I know the rap on Cox was an inability to learn the playbook, but you don't ever know how a RB will perform until you actually stick him in the damn game. Why they insisted on running VS out there in short yardage situations when Hopkins languished on the sidelines was a complete mystery to me.

Magnus

January 22nd, 2011 at 9:44 AM ^

Yeah, there was a thread about this a day or two ago, but seriously...

If you put a guy in a game and he does well, why not leave him in there until he doesn't do well?  And I don't mean one mistake, because lots of guys make mistakes.  Quarterbacks don't get pulled after one INT.  Linemen don't get yanked after one missed block.  Cox has performed well in every single game he's ever participated in, but they wouldn't let him get off the bench.

Just try putting him in against, say, PSU or Wisconsin or Iowa.  Just see what happens.  If he sucks against those guys, whatever.  But how will you ever know if you don't try?

MH20

January 22nd, 2011 at 10:57 AM ^

If you're talking about the failed 4th down at Purdue, that one was on Denard.  IIRC, he was bobbling the ball as he was attempting the handoff and Hopkins never got a clean grab on the ball, which was fumbled and subsequently recovered by Purdue.

In the ND game he plowed through for a TD from one yard out.

Bobby Boucher

January 22nd, 2011 at 11:33 AM ^

Yeah, that whole size versus speed thing didn't work out too well for us.  It was just a difference in philosophy.  I personally agree with you and think that on short yardage situations you go with the size and strength if you have it.  I'm betting that this new coaching staff feels the same way.

WFBlue

January 22nd, 2011 at 10:30 AM ^

but anyone else concerned that if he is having trouble qualifying to get in that he might have trouble remaining in school once he has been admitted.  The student-athlete combination is obviously challenging;  I am amazed that the players can juggle school, lifting, film watching, practice, etc. etc.  They deserve a lot of credit.

CO Blue

January 22nd, 2011 at 12:54 PM ^

I think you have a legitimate concern. But it is hard to say what was interfering with Thomas' academic success throughout high school. It is possible that with all of Michigan's resources, a supportive team/coaching staff, and maybe a change in environment that Thomas will excel academically. I like to think that attending Michigan, with our focus on the "student" part of student athlete, gives young men a better chance of success than does attending a school with fewer resources.