Update on '16 OT Commit Swenson
Yesterday, it was reported by Spath and Fishsaw that Swenson may not end up in this class.
It appears Wiltfong has now relayed the same information.
Apparently, this isn't Swenson waivering on his committment, this is coming from the Michigan side of things due to lack of development on the football field over the last couple seasons.
My take:
I'm on board with most of what Harbaugh does. 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 (either they waiver, they were told up front, etc), Swenson doesn't sit right.
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.
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 11:32 AM ^
I agree, conditionally. IF this is something suddenly dropped on Swenson now, after most other team's OL classes have filled, or if there has been dishonesty/wavering on our staff's part, then it is a bad look. I'm not sure either of those are the case.
I for one hope that Swenson is still part of this class, I think he is a future multi-year starter at RT.
January 19th, 2016 at 11:41 AM ^
It angers me when people try to justify why a scholarship is pulled.
Assuming the recruit has verbally committed:
If the offer is pulled for medical reasons there better be a four year medical scholarship offered in replace of it.
If it is pulled for academic reasons, or for off-the-field, documentable issues, I'm okay with it
If it is pulled for any other reason at all, I think its a crock of shit, despicable, and quite frankly as an athletic director I wouldn't let it go on.
But that is probably a pretty unpopular opinion.
January 19th, 2016 at 11:48 AM ^
Who said his scholarship was pulled?
"May not end up in this class" =/= "Scholarship pulled"
I'm not saying it wasn't, but we don't know that it was.
January 19th, 2016 at 11:54 AM ^
There are a lot of assumptions being made here. It's also possible the coaches offered to honor his scholarship offer but were honest about their assessment of his chances of seeing playing time at Michigan. It's important for Michigan to honor their commitments, but I also think it is just as important for the coaches to be honest with the prospects even if it is something they don't want to hear but may be better for them in the long run.
This is a conversation that I think happens all the time with players in postseason exit interviews. I would rather have the coaches be honest with him now & find a school that better fits him now than have to deal with this 2 years from now with a transfer that could have been avoided if they had been upfront with each other.
January 19th, 2016 at 12:31 PM ^
Pretty rational response. Nice work. I'm hoping this is the situation.
January 19th, 2016 at 1:00 PM ^
January 19th, 2016 at 4:10 PM ^
"It would be insane for a coaching staff to have made up their mind on what a player might be in 4-5 years before they ever get a chance to work with the recruit themselves."
I agree.
It's also insane for a coaching staff to offer a scholarship based on what a player might be in 4-5 years before they ever get a chance to work with the recruit themselves.
The former can easily be avoided by not doing the latter.
January 19th, 2016 at 12:49 PM ^
This is largely how I feel about it too. If they've watched him and determined that he's not what they need (skill level, technique, development, whatever), better to tell him now so he can try to find a school that fits him than to let him sit at the bottom of the depth chart for 2 years and then transfer for playing time. If the coaches think he's, say, a MAC level player, it does everyone involved a disservice to bring him in.
January 19th, 2016 at 1:16 PM ^
Exactly how does your honest conversation with hypothetical recruit go? Do the coaches walk in say something like
"We think you suck, and would rather you go somewhere else. We'll honor your scholarship if you make us, but just know that you'll ride the bench and not see any playing time. So see, it's really better for both of us if you go ahead and pick another school to attend."
Put it however you want, but that is exactly what the recruit will take from the conversation. There are articles going back to last spring where Swenson was quoted as saying that the staff was communicating with him at least every other week so at one point this staff was fairly high on him I would think. To do this at the last moment to a recruit who has been committed for so long is dirty. There is no other way to put it, it is dirty and exactly why we have criticized SEC schools in the past. Just because we have started doing it doesn't make it right, and I see no point in trying to act like it does.
January 19th, 2016 at 2:26 PM ^
I would expect part of my ongoing conversations with any recruit would include what role I see them playing and what they need to do to fulfill it. This wouldn't be anywhere near the first conversation on the subject. I don't suddenly say something stupid like "you suck". I let him know how our future depth chart looks as things change. It will be up to him to take that as a challenge or an invitation to look elsewhere. I'm not going to lie to him and say he's on track to start in year two to keep him happy, even if we might have thought that was true a year ago.
January 19th, 2016 at 1:50 PM ^
This is absolutely a possibility, but at the same time this is a top-ish recruit (around 4*, 2nd-team USA Today). This doesn't appear to be a scrub kid who hasn't faced top competition and would be scared away by some "tough talk" from the coaches. And I doubt coaches would tell someone "oh yeah, we'll definitely honor this very valuable scholarship spot, but we'll bury you on the bench and then you'll transfer in 3 years after you get your degree." That just doesn't seem logical. And even in that case, Harbaugh should have had this conversation with him months ago; I doubt Swenson was regressed enough to go from solidly capable in the coaches' eyes to not being a viable player with limited upside.
I'm fine admitting that this is the occassional cost of competing for national titles, but I'm not going to pull an Occam's Razor in trying to explain the situation when a pretty believable, if bad, explanation exists.
January 19th, 2016 at 2:09 PM ^
I really hate these threads. If so and so did this thing I don't like I'll be mad/disappointed/etc. Let's have more than vague speculation before posing the negative hypotheticals. Can't we at least wait to hear the player's side?
January 19th, 2016 at 3:12 PM ^
January 19th, 2016 at 3:22 PM ^
January 19th, 2016 at 8:56 PM ^
January 19th, 2016 at 3:17 PM ^
I personally know of two ACC schools who changed guard this offseason and told several of their commits this - we're going to honor your scholarship, but if you come here you'll never play - something to that effect. I'm not saying that to take a side, as I don't think that's what happened here, but it does happen.
January 19th, 2016 at 11:53 AM ^
Technically correct, making an assumption here, but making the argument that it is his coice to not end up in the class is a much more unrealistic assumption.
January 19th, 2016 at 12:01 PM ^
It is the assumption that he has no option to remain in the class. I still think the most likely scenario here is that the staff offered to honor his scholarship offer but were honest about their assessment of his chances of playing at Michigan.
January 19th, 2016 at 12:38 PM ^
That's how I'm hoping this works. Hopefully the message goes something like this: "To be candid, we don't think you're on a path to seeing the field much at Michigan. If you want to come to Michigan anyway and prove us wrong, we'll honor your commitment. If you want a good chance to play, though, you should consider other options and we'll help you find a good landing spot."
If it's, "Sorry, guy, you didn't develop like we hoped and we're going in a different direction," then I'm not on board with that this late in the process, especially with a kid who has conducted himself so well and hasn't wavered at all.
January 19th, 2016 at 1:07 PM ^
January 19th, 2016 at 11:59 AM ^
I'm not so sure what would be unrealistic about a 4* athlete choosing to go to a school where the coaches expected he would play rather than one where the coaches (hypothetically) said they expect he would not.
Again, I am not saying that he was not pushed out, but it isn't like Michigan is the only place an athlete get a good eduaction and play high-level football. Perhaps it was his choice to look for an option where he could do both after he was told by the staff that they felt PT was highly unlikely for him at UofM.
None of us know what has happened. I'm not sure that either assumption is more or less realistic at this point.
Edit: Yes -- what Leaders And Best said.
January 19th, 2016 at 1:34 PM ^
January 19th, 2016 at 1:52 PM ^
There has been noise that some recruits may be asked to take a grayshirt. If the coaches are not pleased with Swenson's progress, they may be asking him to take a grayshirt and work on weights for a year. Swenson may not want to do that and thus may not end up in this class.
January 19th, 2016 at 2:20 PM ^
Please ignore.
January 19th, 2016 at 2:01 PM ^
!=
but to each his own.
January 19th, 2016 at 2:02 PM ^
get on the vb.net train and use "<>"
January 19th, 2016 at 12:18 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 19th, 2016 at 12:19 PM ^
We have no idea whether his scholly was "pulled." If so, we have no reason why. Maybe we should just trust Harbaugh to do the right thing in all circumstances. Nobody's perfect, but he certainly seems pretty close.
Bottom line: it's a bit early to get pissed about something when you have no idea whether or why it actually happened.
January 19th, 2016 at 12:20 PM ^
Okay, yeah, let me blindly put my faith behind those that lead me to victory, and not worry about the means along the way.
So long as we win right
January 19th, 2016 at 12:48 PM ^
Since you have had exactly ZERO conversations with any of the individuals involved, yes.
January 19th, 2016 at 12:56 PM ^
that is an assumption you are making
January 19th, 2016 at 12:59 PM ^
I like my odds.
January 19th, 2016 at 2:00 PM ^
January 19th, 2016 at 2:16 PM ^
I liked the odds that my assumption that he's not a coach, family member, teacher, or Swenson himself was correct.
Frankly, I think - and I've mentioned this before - fans forget that there are complex human relationships between coaches/players/boosters/media/administrators and very few of us are privvy to those dialouges. Yes, sometimes they are very obvious, sometimes there is great sluething going on, but many many times not all information is available outside a very small circle - which apparently grates many fans.
January 19th, 2016 at 2:31 PM ^
January 19th, 2016 at 2:39 PM ^
I negged him because he is wrong about me never having had a conversation with anyone involved (even if the conversation has no relevance to the current topic)
January 19th, 2016 at 3:09 PM ^
Then my apologies. Neg away.
January 19th, 2016 at 12:50 PM ^
No, just blindly make assumptions without being in the room and knowing all the information.
January 19th, 2016 at 12:52 PM ^
and we need for life to happen and let the facts come out before we extend judgment. Coach Harbaugh hasn't done any wrong yet, has he? THAT along with the winning is why most of us are onboard with his decisions. It looks SEC-ish from the outside but looks can be deceiving.
January 19th, 2016 at 12:18 PM ^
"anger...crock of shit...despicable" all seem like over-reactions given this obviously imperfect and nubulous system (apparently design features of said system). The ambiguity of an "offer" and a "verbal commitment" create nuance that is only exacerbated in each specific situation.
I'm sure there are despicable crocks of shit every year, but to assume every situation is the same or rises to that level without intimate knowledge seems to be searching for outrage.
January 19th, 2016 at 3:59 PM ^
Well as it turns out, it's about 50-50 on the popularity of your position Incredible. We are indeed a unique fan base!
People in the Bay Area don't pay enough attention to Stanford (most couldn't tell you they just played in the Rose Bowl) for me to recall ANY backlash to JH doing things like people are insinuating is happening here (and Enis, Weaver, more to come...?).
They obvioulsy expect Stanford (and to some extent Cal) to operate at the highest academic levels and not tolerate "bad characters" on their teams, but there was not one peep about Harbaugh being hard to deal with or having questionable ethics until the 49ers started trying to poison the well 4+ years later.
Can we just let this first Harbaugh class play out before jumping to conclusions or making moral proclamations? Please? Not a ONE of you has the slightest idea what's really going on. You jumped to the same conclusions with Sir Scott too, and it turned out it was his academic failings that caused the parting. Same with Viramontes and whatever caused him to jump.
It's great to have a strong desire to win at the highest level and do it completely irreproachably, but this urge to get out front and lead the bandwagon of "Holier-than-Thou" like a bunch of football Carrie Nations is almost without question unique in this universe of endeavor.
January 19th, 2016 at 4:39 PM ^
I don't disagree with you. I am also torn with the desire to dominate on the football field. Some will say that they'd eat this schollie even if it impacts the opportunity to close on a difference maker. I'm not one of them. The game isn't clean and neither is this process. I trust Harbaugh to be careful and selective with this behavior. If it is played cautiously and not constantly, I will look the other way if it helps us win. Desperate and despicable descriptors of my attitude are fair.
January 19th, 2016 at 11:45 AM ^
Agreed. Way too many assumptions here.
How do we know this was just droped on him recently? Perhaps the staff has been very classy in letting him look around while remaining a commit (ala Dele Harding.)
How do we know he was told to look elsewhere? Even if something came from the staff, the message could have been something more like "Unfortunately, with the lack of progression over the past year, we do not envision you playing during the next 4 years." That is honest communication, and one which might prompt a player to decide, on his own, to look elsewhere.
I'm not saying the staff is golden here, but I don't see enough information to reach a conclusion.
January 19th, 2016 at 12:04 PM ^
First of all, "we do not envision you playing during the next 4 years" != look elsewhere/scholarship pulled.
As far as the "droped on him recently?"
One more month until I sign #GoBlue pic.twitter.com/AralKRxWgO
— Erik Swenson (@Eiek77) January 3, 2016January 19th, 2016 at 12:08 PM ^
NOT a particularly good look at all.
January 19th, 2016 at 12:30 PM ^
That would certainly appears to be a mark in the "learned more recently" column.
To give a hypothetical in the other column, he might have been told previously that this was a possiblity only if things really picked up with a number of top recruits, as has happened in the last few weeks.
I'm not saying you're wrong & I'm definitely not saying I'm right (particuarly as I don't have an opinion/assumption on what happened here.)
January 19th, 2016 at 12:37 PM ^
Actually, this doesn't prove he wasn't infomred.
January 19th, 2016 at 12:39 PM ^
Your right it doesn't, but the alternative is calling him a liar
January 19th, 2016 at 1:16 PM ^
January 19th, 2016 at 1:27 PM ^
Spot on. I think that (ex)coaching types and (ex)players are primarily the ones here who find this behavior deplorable (assuming that Ockham's Razor can be used here), whereas the people whose fandom is more connected to winning/losing are quick to paint whatever picture makes Michigan come out as "morally just" here.
Making the argument that something shady (might be) going on here is a lesson in futility, redundant, and it really doesn't matter what I think anyways