Hello: Antwaine Richardson Comment Count

Ace June 12th, 2015 at 2:01 PM

Photo via 247.

Michigan's camp tour has paid off once again, this time in the form of a commitment from three-star Delray Beach (FL) Atlantic CB Antwaine Richardson, according to multiple outlets. Richardson, a high school teammate of incoming freshman DE Shelton Johnson, earned an offer on Sunday after performing in front of the coaching staff at the South Florida satellite camp. He's the 11th commit in the 2016 class and the first at cornerback.


Scout Rivals ESPN 247 247 Comp
NR CB 3* CB NR CB 3*, 86, #81 CB,
#822 Ovr
3*, #88 CB,
#879 Ovr

As you can see, Richardson is another under-the-radar type, so let's head off some of the inevitable comments right now and note that his top two was Miami (YTM) and Wisconsin—yes, both programs offered—before Michigan swooped in.

All four sites list him at 6'0" and 162-168 pounds, a nice frame for a cornerback.


The only scouting reports out there on Richardson right now are quotes from... Richardson. Those can be helpful, but first let's take a look at his film:

I like what I see. Richardson has decent footwork for a taller corner, and he knows how to use his length to his advantage. He's not afraid to be physical; there are a few really impressive jams at the line and some big hits on his tape. A few of the special teams clips indicate he's the type of high-effort, high-athleticism prospect Harbaugh covets.

When Richardson got his Miami offer, he compared himself to a couple of the NFL's very best at his position, per 247's Nate Adelson ($):

“I compare myself to Richard Sherman and Patrick Peterson,” Richardson said. “I’m a speed corner, I can play off or press, and I’m aggressive on the line. I’m trying to get out of my breaks quicker and sink my hips while I’m backpedaling. I have good footwork and I don’t let anybody catch the deep ball on me.”

He also relishes contact, something he told Scout's Benjamin Worgull after adding his Wisconsin offer:

“You have to be real good (to play) in the Big Ten because they have Ohio State, some good teams in the Big Ten,” he said. “You have to bring your ‘A’ game when you play those teams, so getting an offer from Wisconsin means I got to bring my ‘A’ game.”

In Richardson’s mind, his ‘A’ game encompasses all defensive schemes.

“In man coverage, I love covering,” Richardson said. “I am aggressive, I love to tackle, I love to hit hard and I don’t think nobody can catch a deep ball on me.”

For now, that's about it on Richardson in the scouting department. Despite the lack of articles on him, what's on film should answer any questions about why Michigan offered him and accepted his commitment.


Richardson holds offers from Florida Atlantic, Iowa State, Miami (YTM), Rutgers, South Florida, Syracuse, Wake Forest, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and several others.


Delray Beach Atlantic has a solid history of producing D-I prospects, and specifically top-level defensive backs: Mike Rumph (Miami), Brandon Flowers (Virginia Tech), and Jayron Hosley (Virginia Tech) were all picked in the first three rounds of the NFL Draft. Current San Diego Chargers OT Orlando Franklin (Miami) is also an Atlantic product.


According to 247, Richardson had 37 tackles, ten pass breakups, two interceptions, and three forced fumbles as a junior.


ESPN has full testing results that include a 4.70 40-yard dash, which gets zero FAKEs.


Richardson should be afforded a redshirt when he gets to campus, as Michigan is only set to lose Wayne Lyons (and, if his fifth year is unrenewed, Terry Richardson) from their group of cornerbacks after this year. The competition should be wide open when Jourdan Lewis and Channing Stribling graduate following the 2016 season. While Brandon Watson, who looked ready to play a bigger role this spring, and Reon Dawson will provide competition, Richardson and 2015 incoming freshman Keith Washington have the advantage of being hand-picked by Harbaugh and Co.


Michigan is now up to 11 in the class, which is projected to have only 14 spots right now, but that number will inevitably rise between attrition and possible unrenewed fifth-year seniors. Wide receiver, tight end, offensive line, defensive tackle, defensive end, and outside linebacker remain pressing needs, and Michigan is likely to stay in pursuit of help at defensive back unless they decide they'd prefer Chris Evans at corner and Kiante Enis at safety.



June 12th, 2015 at 2:10 PM ^

Stargazers are like the guys who stare at the screen at the Roulette table... and say... it's landed on black 6 times now, the next one must be Red.... must be Red... must be Red.  Lol.


June 12th, 2015 at 3:24 PM ^

Because independent of other information, it is a statistical fact that a four star we sign has a much higher chance of being an excellent college player and future pro than a three star. That is a fact. So people that have a concern over seeing a three or two star signed are actually being quite rational. 

However, as I've said in another thread "other information" is that these coaches should be given the benefit and therefore trusted over the rating. 


June 12th, 2015 at 3:40 PM ^

Not really.  That only applies if you pick a random three star vs. a random four star.  We are talking about a hand-picked three-star who our coaches are evaluating as a guy they definitely want in their class.  That means, they are evaluating him at or above the level of the four and five star talent that they are otherwise looking at (assuming that the class will have a limited number of spots). 


June 12th, 2015 at 4:05 PM ^

by a coach who definitely wants them in the class (or else why would they offer?)

Your argument seems to be that because it's OUR coaching staff, these recruits are likely to be underrated. Perhaps so -- they've certainly earned the benefit of the doubt from me.

The point has nothing to do with your card analogy though.

If you're saying they are electing to take these recruits OVER 4-star recruits -- which ones?  What 4-star CB is willing to commit to Michigan but getting turned down.


June 12th, 2015 at 4:55 PM ^

Cards or not - it's a bad analogy. As other have pointed out.


is not the same thing as variance/uncertainty.

You're actually arguing against it.

In roulette, what happened the time before doesn't matter at all, because each roll is independant.

In recruititng - it is not so.  If Harbaugh turns 10 straight 3-stars in all americans he's more likely to turn an 11th 3-star into the same.



June 12th, 2015 at 4:56 PM ^

That's a fair question, but I make that assumption because 4-stars and 5-stars typically decide closer to signing date (and assuming that we are not reserving spots for each of the guys we're in contention for).  Therefore, it seems that there is a bit of a "bird in the hand is better than 2 in the bush" mentality as well.  Either way, the coaches are calling the shots here and we're just observers. 


June 12th, 2015 at 5:02 PM ^

The strategy can be viewed as turning down a chance at $100 for a sure $50. (The particular values are not the point.)  Some see this as settling given Michigan's recruiting history.  Both Rodriguez and Hoke had no trouble filling up their hope-filled first classes with a stack of 4 star recruits who bought into the future/direction of the program.

Harbaughs approach is different.  Whether it is wrong or right we will find out.


June 12th, 2015 at 7:37 PM ^

But Harbaugh has the ability to turn $50 into $100 and has the track record to prove it. I trust this staff. They are seeking clay to mold (as Drevno puts it) and I'm betting just about every "underrated" recruit we get will improve significantly in the rankings as seniors. I'm fine if we dont win the starz competition, only the one on the field counts.


June 12th, 2015 at 11:00 PM ^

That is not true. The guys harbaugh is offering are still plan a type guys and he obviously really wants them. However as the year progresses you need to move on to plan b and c when your plan a guys dont commit. These guys the coaches like, but aren't necessarily exactly what they want. So they dont always really want them, but they have to fill needs.


June 12th, 2015 at 3:44 PM ^

Also rankings principally measure camp performance and exposure.  Some kids just don't attend these camps which are the source of the rankings data. 

I actually wish there was a lot more transparency in the rankings and if they scored real metrics.  I.e., list of DBs by 40 speeds.  verticals, etc. 

Run all athletes through a combine and have sortable data, instead of qualitative star measures.  It won't cover the intangibles that the coaches have to see, but I feel like it would be a more useful system than "stars". 


June 12th, 2015 at 4:39 PM ^

Or not.  Plenty of testimony from kids saying they didn't get ranked cuz they never showed up at camps.  There's limited staff at these recruiting sites.  They don't randomly watch kid's tape on Hudl just to give kids rankings.  They only rank kids who show up.


June 12th, 2015 at 4:46 PM ^

It's a common argument that so-and-so is underrated because he didn't hit the camp circuit. Underrated is different than unrated.  Also - almost any 2-star kid that gets offered by Michigan immediately gets bumped up to 3 stars.  This has nothing to do with camps.

Camps affect rankings, but they aren't the only thing.


June 12th, 2015 at 4:53 PM ^

Check the rankings yourself.  Look at how many guys are "unrated".  Go click on the high schools and you'll see that more than half the kids are unrated.  Then, once they show up to a camp in their soph or junior years, they become "rated"....  Even by senior year, there are way more unranked guys than ranked guys...

Not even going to continue w/ this discourse because it seems to be falling on deaf ears. 


June 12th, 2015 at 5:00 PM ^

Good thing, I'm not a litigator, because I don't like arguing about splitting hairs.... Anyway, my point is that most HS kids would never get ranked unless they show up at a camp.  For example, if I show up at a Rivals camp and I perform well, I will get a ranking.  Perhaps in order to make that initial ranking, they will look at my tape and ask around, etc., but my point is that process would never really get started unless I showed up at a camp to begin with.


June 12th, 2015 at 4:08 PM ^

You can continue on all you want, but the teams that have in the BCS title games and are consistently in the Top 5/Top 10 in the country year in and year out are the teams that are also at the top of the recruiting rankings. 

Yeah, not every 5 star pans out and yeah, some 3 stars turn into studs.  In this day and age though if you want to be a consistent player in the NC conversation you need to have damn good recruiting classes.


June 12th, 2015 at 4:49 PM ^

Except, that rule doesn't apply to Hoke-era Michigan and Michigan State...  But whatever, not even talking about generic 3-stars.  I'm talking about a 3-star DB that our coaches saw in person and wanted over other DBs in the same class.  That means more to me than accumulating the currency of "stars" that is rendered worthless the second they get on college campuses.  


June 14th, 2015 at 2:59 AM ^

when you can use them.  The last 3 seasons final top 10 lists do not validate the high star theory in the least.  From2013 to 2015 better than 60% of top 10 teams don't fit the theory.                                                                              

name & final rank/3 previous years class recruiting rank avg.                                                                                    

2013 Staee #3 / #32, S Carolina #4 / #20, Mizzou #5 / #40, OREGON #9 / #13, UCF #10/ #67.                                                                

2014  TCU #6 / #31,  Miss St. #7 / #27,  Staee #8 / #34,  Ole Miss #9 / #28, Arizona #10/ #44, Baylor #5 / #33.                                                                                                                                    

2015  #2 OREGON / #21,  TCU #3 / #36,  Staee #5 / #34,  Ga. Tech #8 / #61, Baylor #7 / #26 UCLA #10 / #15.                                                                                                                                        

3 items of note   1) I actually left some teams out that had a top 10 final rank but were not a top 10 recruiter.  2)  Repeat teams TCU, Staee and Oregon class averages went up(in a bad way) from 2013 to 2015. Baylor is the only team that won more and resulted in better class ranking increase from year to year, and that increase was nominal and then followed by a nominal decrease.  3) 5 year averages would not change the outcome other than to prove further that recruiting rankings don't auto qualify you for a top 10 finish. 

Cali Wolverine

June 12th, 2015 at 2:16 PM ^

I used to be a star snob...but the coaches are in the trenches with these kids, and clearly like what they are seeing...and like Beilein...I am sure their stock (or stars) will rise as we get closer to signing day. Looks like Summer Swarm is having huge dividends in 2016...which will also carry over to 2017.