Exit Jaron Dukes, Reon Dawson, Maybe Freddy Canteen Comment Count

Brian March 26th, 2016 at 4:29 PM


Dukes caught the only TD of last year's spring game against Dennis Norfleet

Per Harbaugh:

The departures of Dukes and Dawson bring Michigan to or under 85 depending on the status of the as-yet-unsigned Dytarious Johnson; if Canteen does not make it back they'd be at 84 and able to issue a scholarship to Ryan Glasgow.



March 26th, 2016 at 4:33 PM ^

Although this answers some of the scholarship numbers questions, it stinks to hear this news about these players. I wish them all well and hope they continue to have success off the football field.

Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

MLD Woody

March 26th, 2016 at 4:34 PM ^

Best of luck to them all


(This won't go over well on here, but I hope everything here is legitimate. We'll have to see if more info comes out.)


March 26th, 2016 at 7:00 PM ^

Your comment comes across like:

I don't think Mr. Jones beats his wife. I mean, I've heard rumors that he beats his wife and in this day and age you never know. But, I really don't think and hope he doesn't beat his wife. Obviously, some people think so and you have to wonder why that is but personally I don't think he does.


March 26th, 2016 at 4:37 PM ^

While this sounds weird to say, I hope Dawson and Dukes really are hurt, and this isn't Harbaugh pulling a Saban and forcing these kids out via non-existent medical problems.


March 26th, 2016 at 6:34 PM ^

I see what your point is, but you still get to offer 100 additional scholarships over those next 4 years. Transfers, whether JuCo, grad or other have proven themselves in a way that even the best HS players haven't. Consider Kelly Baraka and Dann O'Neill. I think coaches would still be receptive to taking transfers.

Mr. Yost

March 26th, 2016 at 7:34 PM ^

Regardless, it's a Title IX issue and your school would never be able to achieve proportionality.

Also, what do you do when a coach leaves a bunch of guys enter the draft and/or transfer? Those schools just have to roll with a lower number of players on the roster?

It's a lazy suggestion a million different ways...I'd love it, if it would work, but for so many reasons it wouldn't.


March 27th, 2016 at 10:17 AM ^

I bet there's a lot of young women (who by the way, make up or will make up the majority of college students) who disagree with you. There's no "right" to get a free college education because you can run faster or jump higher or put a ball somewhere better than other people, but we have that, don't we?

Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad


March 27th, 2016 at 1:49 PM ^

Many women would disagree--of course, that doesn't mean they are right (and I grant, maybe I'm not either). To your point though--getting a free education based upon sports ability isn't a right either, and "we have that." But there is a difference--we have that through a completely free choice made decades ago by colleges. That is the opposite of Title 9, which is mandated by government. Right?

My larger point is if you establish that playing sports in college is a bonus and completely extracurricular to the mission of education, then the rationale for ensuring "equal" access by law is demolished

Ghost of Fritz…

March 26th, 2016 at 11:13 PM ^

should be interpreted to consider an equal number of male/female sports as presumptive compliance.

No court has held that the number of male/female scholarships must be equal.  That is merely advisory guidance, correct?

Anyway, many of the problems people have raised with the 25 football LOI/scholarships rule favored by Brian could bel solved by making it 125 football LOIs over 5 years (with some system that would consider transfers as fractional LOIs).

Also, to deal with the real injury problem, raise it to 140 LOIs/scholarsips over 5 years.


March 27th, 2016 at 2:21 PM ^

Yeah I don't get why it's a title IX issue. The whole point is that you won't change the actual number of football scholarships all that much, because ~25 signees a year usually works out to an 85 man roster by normal attrition.

The goal is not to make teams bigger, just to eliminate some shenanigans by removing potential loopholes.

It might be rough for JUCOs, but honestly I have mixed feelings about JUCOs anyway since most of them are football factories for guys who couldn't scrape above the minimum NCAA requirements in high school (that is, I doubt they are really being given an education). Or they are relegated there after getting Sabaned (or Lesed), which this plan would eliminate the incentive for.

But on the other hand it's good for 5th years, since keeping them around doesn't hurt you. You might see fewer guys having to get "firm handshakes".

Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Mr Miggle

March 27th, 2016 at 2:49 PM ^

First of all, the idea is largely to lessen attrition. We've had an unusual amount of attrition in recent years and still average less than 25 recruits per class. So do most other schools.

No one knows what the numbers would be, but give an extra incentive to keep players around, add impediments to transferring and there will surely be bigger rosters. I'd guess much bigger than 85.



Red is Blue

March 27th, 2016 at 7:40 AM ^

I think you could modify Brian'so suggestions and get a better approach than now. You could use a salary cap like system, except instead of salary you use years of eligibility. Any incoming multi year scholarship player counts as a point for each of year he is expected to have eligibility. If he comes back as a red shirt senoir, he counts as a point that year too. His points count whether or not he is still on the team.

You can also offer a limited number of 1 year scholarships.

In any year, you can have a total of 100 (???) Points, not more than 10 (???) Of which can be from one year scholarships.

Obviously the points total could be modified. Don't know what title 9 implications this might have.


March 26th, 2016 at 5:20 PM ^

This won't sound PC and I will probably get negged, but I don't care if they are "really" hurt or not. They were never gonna see the field here, they had the option of transferring, or this medical route which affords them a free education. 

If we want to be a big time consistent national title contender, you have to push the limit. We have played the card for years about the tactics Bama, OSU, etc.. use and you know what, those teams have consistently beat our ass. Get off your high horse, these kids will be fine, their life isn't over, they are receiving a free education from the University of Michigan. They just weren't good enough to play for the football team. 

You can't be squeaky clean and expect to compete for national titles every year (See Michigan basketball). 



March 26th, 2016 at 5:58 PM ^

I want Harbaugh to always act ethically. I will never be in the "win at any cost" camp. There are a million ways you can "win at any cost."

  • Have a sniper take out players on another team.
  • Have someone go undercover and poison another team.
  • Have someone go undercover and steal another team's playbook.
  • When other kids go home, they just happen to be targeted by robbers and are seriously physically injured.
  • A tire on their vehicle just happens to come off when they are cruising at 70 down the Interstate.
  • Have boosters you have never met and don't know find jobs, rent money, other benefits, for causes or individuals related to a player.

I don't want any of those. I don't want Harbaugh to lie and cheat so that Michigan can win.

Now, I have no problem with Swenson's offer being withdrawn. I completely believe that he was told what to do (attend camps, etc.) and he chose not to do it. That, to me, is being straightforward.

I also have no problem with guys choosing a medical scholarship. If you have surgery, if you've been injured, "maybe" you can come back. But if you're buried on the bench, if you really are hurting, if you like being at UofM, if you are given the chance to have a full ride scholarship . . . and not have to go to practice, or work like a dog, man, that sounds awesome. I think that's a GREAT option.

What I would NEVER want to have happen is for Harbaugh to sit someone down, tell them they have no option:  they are going to take a medical scholarship, and aren't given the option of continuing on the bench. There are some "Rudy's" out there. (Yes, I don't like Rudy or ND, but you get my point). There are some Rudy's who would rather be on the team, even never seeing the field. These are guys that were given a 4 year scholarship, and are on the UofM football team. For some of them, to suit up, to run through the tunnel, to go through practices, to have the cameraderie, to stand out the sidelines, is enough. Anyone in that situation should be allowed to stay on the team. Of course, it goes without saying that I'd never want Harbaugh to pressure a doctor into saying someone shouldn't be on the team. 


March 26th, 2016 at 9:03 PM ^

I understand your argument, I guess my issue it more with the rules. I don't believe a player should be guaranteed a spot on the football team for 4 years.

If I was king for a day, players would be compensated, they would have a guaranteed 4 year scholarship at the school, but their roster spot would be year to year. It would prevent this shady "medical issue" business and all the other practices coaches use to modify the roster. 


March 26th, 2016 at 6:47 PM ^

won't neg you, but I do disagree with you.  I only neg people who make racist comments or who name call.

I don't think that integrity and character should be compromised for the sake of winning.  Sports is a great platform to teach those types of principles.  Teaching the opposite has a deleterious affect both initiailly and years later.




March 26th, 2016 at 7:23 PM ^

I agree with you but I also feel for the players that get forced out for dubious reasons. I would gladly take a free education but I'm not a football player. For many of these guys, playing football is their dream. It's got to be tough to chose between not playing at Michigan and getting that degree or going to a lesser school and playing.

That said, I personally have had enough of riding around on a high horse and I wonder how Brian will spin this. I sincerely hope the jokes about Saban and Meyer cease because Michigan is clearly headed down that same path and has been for quite some time. The bottom line is that Alabama and to a lesser degree OSU (constrained by B1G regulations) push the envelope. Everything Harbaugh has done so far is a case of pushing the envelope. I welcome it, because at the end of the day I want Michigan to win.

People here claim that Michigan can win the right way. Well, Michigan has been doing things the right way forever and they have a share of one NC to their name since 1948, the year they won their last undisputed NC. In the BCS/Playoff era, it's really hard to pick out teams that did it the right way. The only two that come to mind are 2000 Oklahoma and 2005 Texas. Of the two, I'm 99% confident that Mack Brown ran a clean program. Bob Stoops has since shown that he is no saint (see his handling of Joe Mixon).


March 26th, 2016 at 9:17 PM ^

Yes, because the "full ride for doing nothing" as you say requires the player to give up the option of playing football at Michigan.

We don't know the full story and I assume eventually the details will surface, but to me it seems like a clear case of Michigan oversigning and now they have to get back down to the 85 scholarship limit. As I mentioned above, I am fine with this approach. But let's not try to rationalize or spin it. It's oversigning.


March 27th, 2016 at 11:53 AM ^

I won't mimic your phrasing.  People get excited when you tell them to get off their high horse.  I also don't like how these types of decisions are painted as "dirty".  

However, I understand your point and I will say that if the players made this decision amicibly with the coaching staff because they realize they aren't going to play, don't want to take the pounding, and still want the Michigan scholarship...no issues with this at all.  The University is holding up its end of the bargain despite getting nothing in return.

It is kind of comical how everytime a roster move is made with this team the blog is full of blood ready to attack Harbaugh for potentially unscrupulous activities.  

I might suggest we support the best coach we've had here since Gary Moeller.  He is trying to ensure his alma mater is one of the best programs in CFB.  Has he given any reason to question his ethics or the way he runs his football program?  The couple of instances where a Pipkins or Swenson popped off...it was shown they weren't telling the whole story.