Michigan OL David Dawson will join Iowa State as graduate transfer

Submitted by umbig11 on January 15th, 2017 at 11:46 AM

The 6-foot-4, 325-pound lineman is from Cass Tech in Detroit. Dawson first played for Michigan during the 2014 season. In 2016, Dawson played in three games (Rutgers, Illinois and Maryland). He had a particularly eventful day against Rutgers, as Dawson played at both right tackle and defensive tackle.

 

https://www.landof10.com/michigan/former-michigan-ol-david-dawson-will-…

Comments

93Grad

January 15th, 2017 at 11:50 AM ^

Power 5 team that is good enough to be in the 2 deep at Michigan next year. We are so lacking in experienced OL depth. Maybe he just wanted a fresh start? Or maybe they guaranteed him a starting spot?

tenerson

January 15th, 2017 at 1:43 PM ^

That's a decent comparison in that ISU was very competitive in all but 3-4 gmes and should have won at least 6. They blew both the OSU (nntOSU) and Baylor games late and lost to UNI in their first game. IMO, Tom Manning is a top 3 OL coach in the country. He took two former walk-ons, a fifth year transfer center, a RS freshman and one senior and somehow made a workable line out of that after the two starting tackles were hurt and suspended. I think this is a really good move for Dawson. He's going to work with a very good coach in a situation where he should be able to start. 

Everyone looks down on ISU, which is expected, but they look to be getting better and the coaching at Dawson's position is really good. 

jdemille9

January 15th, 2017 at 12:24 PM ^

Depth is a concern, but if the staff felt he'd be a key piece in 2017, I'm sure they'd be trying to keep him around. Harbaugh is cleaning house bit by bit. The staff clearly feels more comfortable with their first and second year players than Hoke's fifth year guys. Not surprising.

I wish the kid luck but Michigan will be fine without him, he wasn't exactly a major contributor for a reason. 

Hard-Baughlls

January 15th, 2017 at 1:04 PM ^

and it clearly wasn't happening for him here, let's not project this as a Hoke 5th player vs. Harbaugh 2nd year player thing.

It's a meritocracy with Harbaugh, and he did plenty well with Hoke's players the past 2 years after inheriting them with a 5-7 record.  Harbaugh doesn't play favorites based on anything other than performance - so if that is what you mean by "comfortable" then you are correct.

Yes, we all expect players in Harbaugh's system for 2-4 years to be much better prepared than those he only had 2 years to work with that were already tainted by Hoke/staff coaching (outside D-line where we know Hoke and Mattison can produce).  But this is not "cleaning house" based on playing favorites of his guys vs. Hokes guys - He always said all players at UM were now "his guys."  

It is and always will be a meritocracy with Harbaugh.

jdemille9

January 15th, 2017 at 4:36 PM ^

Yes, that is what I meant by 'comfortable' and yes it will always be based on meritocracy regardless of who the recruits are. Cleaning house was not referring to Hoke's guys vs his guys. It was referring to clearing out guys who are not cutting it, no matter who brought them in. And that is a process that will always happen. 

Mr. Yost

January 15th, 2017 at 12:40 PM ^

But he was in the top 7-8 DTs moving into spring practice.

...Because we don't have 7-8 guys for spring practice.

I understand if he wanted a bigger role and to play offense...but he could've definitely seen more snaps at DT next year IMO. Not a lot, but provide just as much depth as most non-top 150 true freshman would.

pbmd

January 15th, 2017 at 11:50 AM ^

i love it when michigan men have success- even it at other schools

sure wish players like Rawls/ Mundy/others would get a michigan mention when they list their school

rainingmaize

January 15th, 2017 at 12:44 PM ^

Your missing their head coach Matt Campbell, who just finished his first year there. While the record may not be seen as much better, as someone who regularily watches the Big 12, I can assure you that that team is much improved. They played Baylor (when they hadn't given up on the season), Oklahoma State, Oklahoma, and Kansas State real close. They then won two of their last three which included holding Texas Tech to just 10 points.

bamf16

January 15th, 2017 at 12:32 PM ^

I remember how passionately many UM fans reacted to news of Dawson wanting to take visits to other schools after his verbal commitment. And I remember the relief expressed when he signed.

This is why I'm not as quick to pencil Ruiz & Filiaga into the starting OL just yet.

CalifExile

January 15th, 2017 at 5:13 PM ^

The OL in the 2013 class were highly rated by the recruiting services and had offers to match. It is beyond belief that all 4 services and coaches like Saban and Meyers were all so wrong about so many guys. Place the blame where it belongs. Daryl Funk hurt the development of players. One of Hoke's greatest flaws was his loyalty to guys who couldn't handle their coaching duties.

OL Rankings: Kugler #8, #1 C; Bosch #10, #3 OG; Dawson #13, #4 OG; Fox #15, #5 OG; LTT #25, #12 OT, That has LTT at the #168 player overall.

http://247sports.com/Season/2013-Football/CompositeRecruitRankings?Posi…

I won't go into all the offers, here is a sampling:

Kugler:FL, FSU, OSU, ND, PSU, Stan, Tennessee

Dawson: Bama, OSU, FSU, LSU, FL, USC, UCLA, Wisconsin

It's wrong to say Hoke did a bad job of recruiting OL. There was bad luck with Bosch (personal issues) and Fox (injury). Injuries also slowed Kugler I believe, but he, Dawson and LTT (who also had personal issues) were badly served by an incompetent line coach who was retained by Hoke despite repeated failure.

Fezzik

January 15th, 2017 at 7:45 PM ^

This is putting way too much stock in rankings. A 4 star top 100 rated kid who sucks at Big Ten football is no different than a 2 star top 2000 rated kid who sucks at Big Ten football. Yes better coaches could have gotten more out of those guys but I believe you over estimate how much.

Fezzik

January 15th, 2017 at 10:16 PM ^

Hoke believed Funk was a great O line coach. If he can miss that bad on a coach I have concerns how well he can recruit talent to that same position. Also, Why can't you fault the recruiting? If I buy six lottery tickets I'm not guaranteed to win one just because I bought so many.

CalifExile

January 15th, 2017 at 8:38 PM ^

Rankings can be wrong for particular individuals but it's proven that over a large group they are predictive of success. Those proofs have been posted on Mgoblog at various times. Similarly, Saban, Meyers and Jimbo Fisher are human and they will make mistakes at times but they have proven that they are good judges of talent. It is simply not credible that so many people who are skilled evaluators of talent were wrong about so many recruits.

Fezzik

January 15th, 2017 at 10:32 PM ^

My point remains the same though. Obviously the odds are higher that a 4 star recruit will outplay a 2 star but a miss on a 4 star is no different than missing on a 2 star. There is no guarantee ever in recruiting. The proofs you speak of relate to odds of success, not sure things. As for the coaches you mentioned, if they wanted the guys in our class bad enough would they all of actually been in our class? I doubt it. This is also an age where uncomittable offers get handed out and we'll never know which reported offers are 100 percent legit.

CalifExile

January 15th, 2017 at 11:17 PM ^

Of course it's the odds of success and those odds increase as you add data. The odds of getting heads in a coin toss aren't bad if you flip once, the odds against getting heads 6 times on 6 flips are astronomical. The odds that all 4 services and the numerous coaches who offered our commits were all wrng are astronomical.

In 2013 Alabama had the top rated class. They got the top 2 rated OTs plus the top OT from prep school. They got the #2 and #27 OGs. So basically they got the top players they wanted. There is no evidence that Saban didn't like the players he offered who committed to M.

OSU had the #2 class that year. They took the #6 and #70 OTs. I can only guess they must have had a lot of OL depth at the time. Again, there is nothing to suggest that Meyer didn't think the players he offered were quality players.