So, About Shea Patterson Comment Count

Brian

Image uploaded from iOS
LaQuon Treadwell rebate, come on down? [Bryan Fuller]

Yo. Bolded alter-ego. Get in here.

what

So here's this:

Multiple well-placed sources have confirmed to the Ole Miss Spirit today that quarterback Shea Patterson has been granted permission by Ole Miss to talk to other programs about potentially transferring. Patterson and Ole Miss executed what is termed a "permission to contact" form on Friday, according to those sources. ...

Well-placed sources also told the Ole Miss Spirit that Michigan is probably the favorite to land Patterson, if he does execute a transfer from Ole Miss.

FWIW, Patterson's release bars him from SEC schools and other teams on Ole Miss's schedule the next two years.

What?!

Yeah.

I have questions.

Shoot.

I thought Patterson wasn't immediately eligible?

By the letter of the law he's not. The NCAA automatically grants a free transfer to anyone whose eligibility expires before a post-season ban does, but since Ole Miss just got one extra year only their rising seniors are 100% free and clear to leave. Patterson is going to be a junior.

However, it would make zero sense for Patterson to transfer to Michigan if he did have to sit out a year. If Patterson isn't immediately eligible he'd enter 2019 as a redshirt junior at a school with an entrenched starter who's either in the same class (Peters) or younger (McCaffrey). Therefore we have to assume there's a path to immediate eligibility in the world where Patterson does come to Michigan. This section of the NCAA rulebook that comes immediately before the "if your eligibility is covered by a post-season ban you can transfer free" section might be it:

14.8.2.1 Residence Requirement. The one-year residence requirement for student-athletes may be waived under the following conditions or circumstances: (Revised: 7/24/12) ...

For a student-athlete who transfers to a member institution after loss of eligibility due to a violation of the regulation prohibiting pay for participation in intercollegiate athletics (see Bylaw 12.1.4) or a violation of recruiting regulations (see Bylaw 13.01.1), or for a student-athlete who transfers to a Division I institution after loss of eligibility due to involvement in a violation of the freshman or transfer eligibility requirements for financial aid, practice and competition set forth in Bylaws 14.3.1, 14.5.4 and 14.5.5. The Management Council may waive these requirements only upon a determination of the innocence or inadvertent involvement of the student-athlete in the violation.

I'm not sure what a "loss of eligibility" means in this context. It seems clear that this section is designed to let players leave after specific sorts of NCAA violations, as long as they're innocent of them personally. FWIW, in 2003 all Baylor basketball players were eligible to leave immediately after the Bliss scandal. That's... uh... maybe a sui generis kind of thing, but the NCAA only banned Baylor from the postseason for one year.

In this specific case, Ole Miss's desperate attempt to keep the program together might backfire on them. Safety Deontay Anderson sat this year out and is now petitioning for immediate eligibility—he's even using Houston Nutt's lawyer!—because Ole Miss lied to him about the investigation:

According to Mars, Anderson claims that both Freeze and Bjork indicated that the NCAA investigation would not have a negative impact on the football program and that the bulk of the alleged violations pre-dated Freeze’s arrival, which was proven to be false. Those statements were allegedly made both in a group setting during Anderson’s recruiting visit on Jan. 29-31, 2016, and in private meetings with Freeze, including one instance where his father Michael Anderson implored Freeze to tell the truth about the severity of the allegations and potential penalties.

Ole Miss did not publicly release its first Notice of Allegations until May of that year.

According to Mars, Anderson submitted to the NCAA that he would not have signed with Ole Miss had those statements not been made.

“...in that individual meeting with Coach Freeze on Jan. 31 Mr. Anderson very emphatically asked to just tell the truth about the nature of the allegations and what the implications could be.

“Mrs. Anderson vividly remembers that, and so does Deontay and it underscores how important it was to all these student-athletes and their parents to get a full understanding of what the situation was and it underscores how unconscionable it was for them to be told anything less than the truth.”

If—when?—Anderson gets that waiver that should open the floodgates for the entire 2016 class. If Michigan gets Shea Patterson because Hugh Freeze was lying to everyone and people, including purported journalists, believed him, you will hear the deep rumble of my evil mastermind laugh from sea to shining sea.

Uh... is Patterson going to be eligible? I mean, #1 QB in the class of 2016 decides on Ole Miss?

Patterson wasn't implicated in any of the violations. And Ole Miss hired Patterson's brother Sean immediately after Patterson committed. That, rather than some money to keep mom's lights on, was likely the impetus to go play for Hugh Freeze. These days high-end QB recruits are often from affluent families that can afford the camp-trotting and intensive coaching; the Pattersons were probably focused more on the pot of NFL gold at the end of the rainbow than anything up front.

FWIW, like Devin Bush Sr., Sean is a legitimate football coach. He had analyst/QC roles at LSU and Arizona before his move to Ole Miss, and was a three-year starter at Duquesne prior to that. I'd bet a dollar that if Patterson transfers Sean will come along in a similar non-coaching role.

And you're fine with this?

I think players should be paid. I also think people should follow the rules laid out for them, and advocate to change them if they feel the rules are wrong instead of seeking personal advantage by breaking them under the table.

But what about Peters... and McCaffrey?

The major downside of taking Patterson is what it might do to Michigan's already desperately thin collection of QBs not currently in high school. Brandon Peters had a promising start to his career, and might take badly to Harbaugh importing a guy just when the depth chart opened up for him. While Patterson's a big fish, losing Peters would be a blow. I'm not sure maybe one year of Patterson backed up by McCaffrey is preferable to certainly two and maybe three years of Peters.

Any transfer in would be a delicate situation. Michigan's best approach might be emphasizing that Patterson wants to be a one and done; if that's the case than Peters's situation is basically identical to what it was with Speight around: competing for the job and maybe getting blocked for one more year.

McCaffrey's extra year means Patterson won't be as threatening to him; don't think it would impact him much.

Any other dudes we could pirate away? Especially tackle-shaped dudes? Please tell me there's a tackle-shaped dude.

The big fish is of course Greg Little, the former five star who was PFF's third-highest-graded SEC OT as a true sophomore. Little has given no public indication that he's on his way out, has no connection to Michigan, and doesn't have a brother in coaching that helps explain why on Earth he'd go to Oxford. He is in that 2016 class that might be set free, though, and if dude is thinking about heading to the NFL after 2018... I mean. It could happen! Shut up.

We've received some intel that Michigan is interested in one of Ole Miss's wide receivers. Sophomore AJ Brown, PFF's top-rated SEC WR, led the conference with 75 catches for 1200 yards this year and is also in that 2016 class; junior DaMarkus Lodge caught 41 balls for 700 yards and is definitely free and clear to transfer as a rising senior. We think it's Brown but aren't clear on that. (Correction: we think it's Van Jefferson.) While Michigan has a lot of upcoming talent at WR they have maybe one established outside WR in Donovan Peoples-Jones and could not turn up their nose at Brown.

Michigan has no other spots of glaring need and doesn't have a lot of room to play with—this recruiting class is going to be smallish—so it's unlikely they go after anyone who doesn't directly address QB, WR, or OT.

Is this actually happening? These things get talked about all the time and they never ever happen.

This one looks like it's actually happening. Patterson and the WR in question are tentatively scheduled to be on campus this weekend. That's much farther than these rumors usually get.

Comments

stephenrjking

December 4th, 2017 at 1:44 PM ^

Third string QBs generally don't matter. Who is the third string QB at Alabama? At Georgia? At USC?

Nobody knows, and nobody cares, because they're not going to play. And if they were to play, that's a level of disaster that would wreck their seasons. Which, hey, we know what that's like. 

Who was Michigan's third-string QB in 2007? 2003? 1999? 1991? I would have to look it up. They weren't significant. People are acting like we're going to have two QBs hurt every season, and that is simply not the case. 

Having a raw freshman as a third string (the NFL term for that is "emergency QB," a role notable only for laughs when it was perpetually filled by Tom Tupa, who was a punter) isn't the end of the world. If Michigan goes with Peters and McCaffrey, and they both get hurt, Michigan is in trouble no matter who the third string is. May as well use a guy we're developing. 

 

Blue in Paradise

December 4th, 2017 at 1:54 PM ^

a college-ready 3rd string quarterback.  You are right that many seasons this is not an issue, but that is gambling with the team's season.

And why do people think that McCaffrey would balk at being 3rd string as a redshirt freshman?  Tate Martell went to OSU knowing that he would be no higher than 3rd string for 2 years.  Tua went to Bama knowing that he won't likely wouldn't be the starter until he was a senior.

These guys were rated higher than our guys and they seem fine with a chance to compete.

NFL isn't comparable because you have practice squads and if your team doesn't have a competent QB on the practice squad, you can make a trade or sign an unretired veteran as a stop gap.  Also, you can usually pick someone up from another team's squad if things get desparate.

ijohnb

December 4th, 2017 at 2:07 PM ^

is, we are already developing that kind of pipeline without Patterson.  Peters can feasibly start for the next three years, with competition from McCaffrey behind him, and Milton behind him (who probably will not start until he is at least a junior) with Dolye in the same class.  We will also probably sign 2 QBs in 2019.  To me, bringing in Patterson would look pretty clearly like a force out to Peters.  And if he just isn't all that, then fine, it may be a move Harbaugh has to make and I get that.  But I would not expect Peters to stick around in that scenario.

stephenrjking

December 4th, 2017 at 2:09 PM ^

Your arguments about third string QBs are specious. The willingness of recruits to come in as the third guy has nothing to do with the williness of a guy who has been in a program for two and a half years waiting his turn, seeming to get it, and then getting passed by a transfer. 

And teams simply do not put a lot of attention on keeping game-ready THIRD string quarterbacks. Nobody does. Not in college, not in high school, not in the NFL. There is the starter and there is the backup, who in an optimal situation can step in and run the same offense. The third guy is virtually always irrelevant. When the third guy is young, he is important for future seasons, and they work at developing him, but they aren't expecting him to contribute in that season.

Who is Alabama's third-string QB? Who is Clemson's? 

This argument is a red herring, anyway. Michigan is not looking at Shea Patterson for depth. They are looking at Shea Patterson as a potential starter. Peters and McCaffrey know it. They didn't sign on to be depth. They signed on to have a chance to start. Now, McCaffrey can indeed be that "future prospect" guy with plenty of years of contributions left. Peters? Another year or two on the bench and it's getting late. He could easily be passed by McCaffrey. 

You are basically arguing that Peters should be ok with waiting at least a year to start and maybe not even then because college teams should have three guys capable of winning football games on the roster, and that is simply fanciful.

Blue in Paradise

December 4th, 2017 at 4:55 PM ^

I am back now and conversation has moved on.  I do love how Harbaugh is concurrently getting criticized for not going after enough 5*s in the 2018 class and now for showing interest in a 5* transfer that wants to potentially come to Michigan.

This is why you don't make decisions based on idiotic  fan base tweets / posts.  Did you hear that Tennessee?

MinWhisky

December 4th, 2017 at 4:05 PM ^

...that's probably one of the reasons BP would have been 'unhappy' and/or 'sulking' as some have reported.  BP thought he had won the #2 only to be told he was #3, where he knew there was little chance of playing. Furthermore, if Patterson is offered, who could argue if BP were thinking "Here we go again.  Doesn't matter what I do in practice, JH is going to slot me in as the #3 once again".

Kevin13

December 4th, 2017 at 1:45 PM ^

normally you don't get down to your third string QB, but isn't Harbaugh tasked with trying to win football games and championships? You need top flight talent to do this, whether you recruit it or find it via a transfer. People would be all over us getting Little here, well, couldn't that piss off a Stueber, who might be a top flight tackle someday and end up transferring?

You need to win and doing it attracts even more big time players. If Shea came here next year and ended up starting and we won an NC would people still be upset if it cost us Peters?

Look I don't want to lose either Peters or McCaffery,. but it's not often the top QB from a class a couple of years ago comes available and is very interested in your school. Harbaugh did recruit him and if we had landed him then Peters probably goes elsewhere.

People are bitching about our recruiting class, now we have a chance to land a 5* QB who could play next year and people are saying we shouldn't take him?????

Not so sure that Peters or McCaffery would transfer either as it would definitely mean another year sitting out and then competing for two years with very little to no playing experience doesn't mean they will definitely start with where they would transfer to.

Let's let it play out and trust Harbaugh will do what's best for this team and program. Next year could be a very good year, as long as we get very good QB play. Bring in the best, roll the balls on the field and see who gets the starting nod.

Blue in Paradise

December 4th, 2017 at 1:57 PM ^

And I would add that there is no way on Earth that this impacts McCaffrey.  There is a 2 year eligibility gap between him and Patterson - he already had that with Peters and Speight - so it is nonsensical that he would transfer due to Patterson.

funkywolve

December 4th, 2017 at 2:35 PM ^

even without Patterson, I've said it in other threads but I doubt McCarrery and Peters both finish their college careers at UM.  They are only one year apart.  If McCaffery beats out Peters, there's no way Peters wants to be the 2nd string QB the rest of his college career.  If Peters beats out McCaffery, I'm guessing McCaffery starts looking for playing time else where.

In reply to by ijohnb

UMFanStuckInIA

December 4th, 2017 at 1:07 PM ^

I cannot pinpoint why I feel this way....but I feel the same way as Ijohnb.  This feels like a move we would have made two years ago but not now.  I feel it projects instability in the program.  I would prefer we show our allegiance to Peters and McCaffrey and move forward.

In reply to by ijohnb

schreibee

December 4th, 2017 at 1:13 PM ^

Well, the truth seems to be that Patterson to M makes sense for everyone EXCEPT Brandon Peters... right?!

And if Peters beats him out, fair & square, Patterson would have no recourse but to deal with it, giving us great depth at QB. He couldn't transfer again without having to sit a year.

Or am I missing something?

In reply to by ijohnb

Kevin13

December 4th, 2017 at 1:24 PM ^

that you would be adding a 5* QB who was the top rated QB in the nation 2 years ago. If you watched our QB play this past season, outside of Peters, it was horrible and cost us games.

The QB position is the most important on a team and if you want to win a championship you need championship play from your QB. As a coach you do what is best for your team and briing in the best talent you can wether you recruit it or find a top flight transfer. There will and should always be competition at this level.  Peters looks to have a very bright future and will be in the running to be the starter next year and may very well win that competition. But, if you find a QB that is even better then him, are you telling me you wouldn't take him and play him?

I don't think Peters would transfer, because if he did he would have to sit out another year and then compete to play two years with only 4 games of experience under his belt so it wouldn't be a definite he could leave and start somewhere else, unless he goes to something like a MAC school.  It worked out well a couple of years ago when we brought Ruddock in....

ijohnb

December 4th, 2017 at 1:38 PM ^

would start at a lot of places.  Peters isn't some scrub.  He was a high four star recruit with all kinds of offers.  If his choice is stay here and not play or transfer and play, my guess is that he is going to transfer, swiftly. 

In reply to by ijohnb

Heptarch

December 4th, 2017 at 2:09 PM ^

Except if he transfers, he doesn't play, he sits out for a year. By the time he's playing at this hypothetical school, he'd probably be starting here (since consensus seems to be Patterson is a one-and-done).

ijohnb

December 4th, 2017 at 2:23 PM ^

isn't "ding ding ding ding," at all.   First, there is no guarantee that Patterson would be "one and done."  Second, it is not a given that Peters would then beat out McCaffrey.  Bringing in Patterson would essentially be to replace Peters on the depth chart.

In reply to by ijohnb

Maynard

December 4th, 2017 at 2:45 PM ^

If he wasnt one and done, then he would be a starter for two years which would be the same two years we probably get out of BP going forward.

 

In reply to by ijohnb

Heptarch

December 4th, 2017 at 7:29 PM ^

OK.  I'll play along.

In your hypothetical, then, Shea Patterson transfers to Michigan and stays two years, both of which he's the starter.  That means, necessarily, that he's better than Brandon Peters and, obviously, that the team is consequently better as a result.

If, after Patterson graduates, Peters can't beat out McCaffrey for the job, that again means that he wasn't the best QB on the team and that the team is better with McCaffrey at the helm.

For the life of me I can't see any negatives in that for the program or the fans.  The only negative (and a suppositional one at that) is for Brandon Peters who was not good enough to win the starting job.

The simple fact of the matter is that the overriding focus of Jim Harbaugh's job is to win games.  Yes, we expect him to win with integrity, good sportsmanship and do things "the Michigan Way".  But he's here to win.  He will, and should, do everything within the rule book to accomplish that end.  If he feels that bringing in a QB transfer gives the team a better chance to win, then so be it.

In reply to by ijohnb

NowTameInThe603

December 4th, 2017 at 2:14 PM ^

And sit out a year? Learn a new system? Or suck it up improve in practice, find your "voice, and learn the playbook even more? Then if Patterson is a one and done you get your chance to start.

In reply to by ijohnb

Catchafire

December 4th, 2017 at 2:36 PM ^

In the short term it is nice to have Patterson, but in the long run it doesn't help us much.  I'd rather focus on who we have at QB and WR because the well runs deep. 

In reply to by ijohnb

socalwolverine1

December 4th, 2017 at 3:17 PM ^

I agree, I think bringing in any grad transfer now when we have great QB talent waiting to play stinks

Going forward, why would any QB recruit pick Michigan over other schools? Because Michigan is signaling to them that no matter how awesome you are, we're going to keep looking at grad transfers which, by the way, have a very good chance of bumping you even if you put in your time for two years on the bench. Why likely? Because the grad transfer will always come in with more experience in live games, like Rudock and O'Korn. Just imagine recruiting against any of the big name coaches in the midwest region, they will all be pointing to Michigan reneging on its recruiting promises, however overstated they may be.

I totally understand going after a grad transfer if the cupboard is bare, like it was when we nabbed Rudock, but right now is a totally different case, and it's a dangerous one for the reputation of our program. Peters immediately showed his talent both in the Spring game and when he was finally given a chance in a real game. There's no reason to believe McCaffrey won't do the same when given the chance. So why would we consider to do something that will absolutely hurt our QB recruiting going forward? If our pattern is to go after grad recruits every year, then projecting backwards, a middling recruit guy like Tom Brady would never have seen the field for us.

And how is Michigan a "meritocracy" again? The minute Peters finally got a chance this year, we all saw how much more talented, composed, and situationally aware he was than O'Korn. The biggest failure of our coaches this year was denying Peters playing time as soon as Speight got hurt. I don't care if O'Korn performed well enough to beat Purdue, Peters still should have been the first man up in that game. Just imagine if we would have had a more experienced Peters available against Michigan State and Penn State, where O'Korn's panicking, deer-in-the-headlights lack of composure never gave us a chance to win. We would have had a better chance to win those games with Peters, of that I am convinced. I'm tired of all the experts here making excuses like, "Oh, there's no way a red shirt freshman could handle that kind of pressure!". Really? Have you looked around the B1G at all? How about the performance of the inexperienced Iowa kid against Ohio State? How about the inexperienced Ohio State kid who replaced Barrett against us? And on and on... 

StephenRKass

December 4th, 2017 at 12:28 PM ^

So, I am understanding ego and alter-ego as saying that it is worth it to bring in Patterson, if he wants to come to Michigan? The assumption is that he would be good to go, and could learn the schemes and plays and be up to speed by the next season. I guess I'm wondering how long it takes Harbaugh to "develop" a QB.

I'm also assuming that it is worth the risk of losing Peters or McCaffrey or both?

In reply to by ijohnb

1VaBlue1

December 4th, 2017 at 12:53 PM ^

You recruit to bring in new talent and depth at every position.  So what if Patterson is a transfer?  He would add immediate talent and depth to a position that returns 3.5 games of starting experience from a RS soph and a RS frosh.  You call that adequate depth?

Why recruit Aubrey Solomon if you're going to be in on 5-star DT talent this year?  Wasn't the bevy of 4-star DL last year enough to not croot Solomon?   Think about what you're saying...

Mr Miggle

December 4th, 2017 at 1:21 PM ^

First of all, we don't rotate much at all at LB or DB either. Second, depth is important everywhere, whether you rotate players frequently or not. Third and most importantly, QB is far and away the single most important position. Depth is absolutely critical there when you do need it. It's coaching malpractice to ignore that.

Mr Miggle

December 4th, 2017 at 2:24 PM ^

They might miss a handful of snaps because they took a hard hit or something, but that's not rotating your players.

Furbush was subbing in for a DL when we played the 3-3-5. Bush, McCray and Hudson played almost every snap until Uche picked a few late in the season. It was the same before with Morgan and Bolden. Ross got subbed out a lot for a 5th DB. We've gone to a viper to avoid that.

I think you could argue that we rotated our QBs that much bringing Peppers in. 

 

In reply to by ijohnb

Kevin13

December 4th, 2017 at 1:27 PM ^

holds and you always try to recruit the best players you can. Outside of a week or two ago, did you think JH thought the top QB from the 2016 class was going to be available again? He did recruit him out of high school.  Do you think just because he is now available we shouldn't talk to him because we have two freshman coming in next year who we recruited?

Mr Miggle

December 4th, 2017 at 12:57 PM ^

One sophomore and one freshman on campus.  We're counting on two recruits who haven't signed an LOI to provide our depth. This is a far from ideal situation that no coach would want. If the coaches are recruiting players that are so fragile that they can't repair it without them all leaving, then they've already made their mistakes. It wouldn't be in adding a QB now.

You've got to assume that Harbaugh will talk to his QBs about Patterson coming in to compete with them. If they tell him not to or they'll bolt, what would you suggest he do? I think it's not a plausible scenario. If you lose a QB because they've been beaten out by a better player, that's just part of the game. You can't play worse players just to keep them happy.

Losing one of the incoming QBs seems a more likely concern to me. We'd have less need for two and the depth chart looks less appealing to them. It's a lot easier for a recruit to decommit, than a player to transfer and sit out a year. Patterson is planning to decide right around the early signing day, btw.