Thomas Rawls in for Seattle

Submitted by Ihatebux on

Once again, Wow how did we not play him more

MGoBoard

PurpleStuff

September 27th, 2015 at 6:56 PM ^

Rawls left because in 2013 he was behind Fitz AND Green AND Smith.  Fitz (who put up nearly 2,600 yards of offense and scored 30 TD at UM, despite battling injury and playing behind a horrendous offensive line as a senior, and is still on the Steelers practice squad in the NFL) isn't the guy to blame for anything that has ever been wrong with Michigan football.

Joined: 04/21/2009

MGoPoints: 15969

Bluesnu

September 27th, 2015 at 8:38 PM ^

Rawls wasn't the issue here. I'm not sure what it was at a threshold level, but ultimately it came down to coaching in some form (whether of the running backs, OL, or both). Our backfield recruits were, IMO, the best in the nation in terms of prospects. We had Justice Hayes (4 star, #3 overall RB), Derrick Green (5 star, #1 overall RB), Dennis Norfleet (4 Star, #5 overall RB) and Fitz (4 Star, #8 overall RB). And who was our best? Deveon. I'm not one of those persons who is all about stars and recruiting, but those numbers tell me that either every analyst got 5 different players wrong, or our coaches couldn't develop talent. I'm going with the latter. Just look at the players that were similarly ranked in their respective classes and how they panned out. Derrick Green is a perfect example. The number 2 RB in his class was Greg Bryant who went to ND (and now left for academic reasons). Bryant is head and shoulders above green in terms of development and play. These aren't coincidences people. There's a common denominator.

Joined: 01/06/2011

MGoPoints: 381

Lakeyale13

September 27th, 2015 at 6:28 PM ^

Seeing Rawls in the NFL gives me hope!!! Makes me realize this football team is full of talent, just talent that was never developed. Thank you Coach Harbaugh!!!!

Joined: 11/16/2014

MGoPoints: 27203

Danwillhor

September 27th, 2015 at 6:33 PM ^

as you can either do it or not, you fight or you fall at the first touch, etc. Once you learn protection and the system it's about the OL and you. He was trash at UM. He ran weak, chose poor lanes when the terrible OL opened them, etc. His time here is on him and, at most, Fred Jackson. He played well when his future depended on it but also lower competition with a better OL.

Joined: 12/02/2008

MGoPoints: 8609

Danwillhor

September 27th, 2015 at 7:40 PM ^

my point is when and why he suddenly could. All signs point to "not being at UM" but that's still on him. Smith is the same back with Hoke and Harbaugh. Green pretty much the same, too. Rawls ran weak even when he broke open. He goes to CMU and the NFL (!) and he runs with authority, vision, etc. I'm sure the old staff had something to do with it but I think it's more on him. He gave VERY little effort here.

Joined: 12/02/2008

MGoPoints: 8609

MichiganExile

September 27th, 2015 at 6:40 PM ^

There's quite a few rumors out here in Seattle that Marshawn Lynch may be looking at this as his last year. If true, Rawls has a real chance to make something for himself by showing well in the time he gets. The Hawks love a power runner. 

Joined: 01/12/2009

MGoPoints: 12384

PurpleStuff

September 27th, 2015 at 6:45 PM ^

I'll try to add some facts instead of making awful, dumbass statements like "he was trash at UM."

As a sophomore in 2012 Rawls got into the mix behind Fitz and produced 242 yards on 57 carries and scored 4 TD.

Then Hoke signed Green and Smith, and for whatever reason Rawls was buried on the depth chart in 2013 (he only got 3 carries against CMU all year while Green got 83 and Smith got 26 behind Fitz).  He then transferred to CMU and went for 1,100+ yards and 10 TD in 2014.

Smith is starting to look like a player this year, so not sure if at the end of the day Rawls will look like the better option between those two.  If there's an accusation to make, maybe it is buying the 5-star hype on Green and giving him every chance to fail rather than having faith in a guy like Rawls (or even Smith who is outperforming Green now), but even that assumes there were no other issues (behavior, grades, learning the playbook, etc.) that we don't know about.

Joined: 04/21/2009

MGoPoints: 15969

MichiganExile

September 27th, 2015 at 8:45 PM ^

That is not true. The Hawks signed Fred Jackson to more money than Michael was guaranteed this year and functionally took his roster spot regardless of what Rawls did. Rawls impressed in preseason and training camp enough to find a roster spot. 

http://www.fieldgulls.com/2015/9/6/9270229/christine-michael-trade-cowb…

They were probably going to cut him anyway primarily because of the frustration the organization had with him being consistent in following his blocks as well as his apparent inability to change carrying hands to prevent fumbles. 

 

Joined: 01/12/2009

MGoPoints: 12384

double blue

September 27th, 2015 at 7:15 PM ^

100 yards for Rawls at the two minute warning. Great job. Although it came against the pathetic bears 100 is 100.

Joined: 09/03/2009

MGoPoints: 4332

Qmatic

September 27th, 2015 at 7:46 PM ^

To be honest, I never thought he was worth a scholarship back when he was on our team. Jackson really wanted Rawls, and I think much of it had to do with the fact Rawls excelled in HS under Jackson's son

Joined: 01/09/2013

MGoPoints: 32723

west2

September 27th, 2015 at 8:22 PM ^

Rawls really did not perform well at M. Couldn't find the open holes seemed to not have any acceleration etc. Leaving M was a smart choice to salvage his potential pro career. Coaching matters as does the right fit for players with teams. Its good to see him do well and live the dream.

Joined: 01/23/2011

MGoPoints: -998175

PurpleStuff

September 27th, 2015 at 10:18 PM ^

You say he didn't perform well, but that just isn't the case.  He never really played here at all.  The last time he saw the field at UM was as a true sophomore backing up an incumbent 1,000 yard rusher.  He had some good moments (90 yard game against Illinois) and decent if not great numbers (4.2 ypc and 4 TD).  By midseason he was pretty much in a direct competition with Fitz for the starting job until Denard came back and put up multiple 100 yard games to close out the year at RB. 

Then he didn't play at all a year later.  Then he transferred. 

You can argue he should have played more or that more should have been done to discourage his transfer.  But you can't argue that he failed as a Michigan player because he really wasn't one for very long, at least in terms of getting a legit shot on the field.  I don't get the people acting like he started for 2-3 years and played like shit.  That just did not happen.

Joined: 04/21/2009

MGoPoints: 15969

snarling wolverine

September 27th, 2015 at 10:55 PM ^

It's amazing.  I remember us landing him as pretty much a flier at the end of the recruiting season, and he seemed like a reach.  I just didn't think he had the talent to do it in the B1G - forget the NFL...

 I guess he was yet another casulty of our brutal run game under Hoke.

 

Joined: 12/14/2011

MGoPoints: 98330

PopeLando

September 27th, 2015 at 11:33 PM ^

Running backs don't seem to follow the rules which govern football talent evaluation. For every Adrian Peterson, who was correctly identified as a can't-miss back, there are literally dozens of RBs who were overlooked or unheralded. And their level of talent can change based on the team they're on. That's why an NFL team wants to think long and hard before drafting an RB in the high rounds. I haven't done the research, but I'd bet you're equally likely to find a starting RB among unsigned free agents... So Rawls mat have legitimately sucked here, or maybe he deserved a more consistent opportunity. But you can't go wrong blaming Hoke's offensive talent identification, player development, or decision-making

Joined: 08/01/2015

MGoPoints: 68246