 |
| Thomas Rawls (#38) |
Height: 5'10"
Weight: 218 lbs.
High school: Flint (MI) Northern
Position: Running back
Class: Sophomore
Jersey number: #38
Last year: I ranked Rawls #56 and said he would be a backup running back. He had 13 carries for 79 yards (6.1 yards per carry).
I can't say I'm a fan of the way Rawls was used last season. I'm not sure why the #4 running back on the roster (behind Fitzgerald Toussaint, Michael Shaw, and Vincent Smith) needed to burn a potentially valuable redshirt to run the ball a few times against Eastern Michigan, Minnesota, and Purdue. His 10 carries against Minnesota were in garbage time, and someone else could have picked up those other 3 carries against EMU and the Boilermakers. Inexperienced running backs can step right in and be very good, so I don't think he needed those 13 carries in order to be ready for 2012.
But going into 2012, Rawls might be the game one starter after all. It looks like incumbent starter Toussaint will be suspended for at least part of the Alabama game due to his drunk driving arrest, which leaves the running back duties up to Rawls, Smith, and guys who have never stepped on the field at Michigan. Rawls ran well in the spring game back in April, and reports from practice say Rawls "runs angry." He's a battering ram with a little bit of speed. Toussaint had success against good defenses last year, so he's a known quantity. Rawls had success against bad teams and Michigan's backups in the spring, so he's still a little unproven. I'm going to go out on a limb and trust practice reports here, so I expect Rawls to be pretty solid . . . but I also hope Toussaint doesn't have any more slip-ups and can return as soon as Brady Hoke sees fit.
Prediction: Part-time starting running back; 80 carries, 360 yards, 3 touchdowns
You answered your question from para. 1 in para. 2. It is a good thing Rawls got those carries last season or he would be like a deer in the head-lights against Bama.
ReplyDeleteNah, I answered my question from paragraph 1 with the final sentence of paragraph 1. The difference between 13 carries in 2011 and playing against Alabama as a redshirt freshman would be negligible.
DeleteA little unrelated to Rawls, but a similar positional question. A friend of mine who follows Ohio State recruiting likes to compare Deveon Smith to Boom Herron. Thinks Green is same type of back, with a little more long speed. I imagine you would agree from what I've read.
ReplyDeleteMy question to you: based on your film study-how do you like the Deveon Smith and Boom Herron comparison (tatto jokes aside)?
I think the Smith/Herron comparison is pretty accurate. Herron isn't a great running back but ran behind a quality offensive line, so his stats looked good. I think Smith is going to be in the same boat. Plus they're both physical runners, but not particularly big.
DeleteDerrick Green has more speed than any of them, but his balance isn't as good.
I agree with you that an inexperienced RB can come in and play well, but one thing people, including myself, noticed was how nervous and jittery Rawls was against Minnesota while carrying the ball. I think it's a good thing he got the butterflies out of his chest last year. He also got a first hand look at the speed of the game.
ReplyDeleteHaving played some college athletics myself (in the early 80's, along time ago I know) I totally agree. Lets hope the little experience he did garner will indeed help him going up against that Bama D. If they shut down the run, as I expect they will, Denard is going to have to beat them through the air. A tall order indeed.
DeleteI didn't notice that at all. In fact, he had a couple of nice runs where he executed perfectly. 13 carries is nothing, especially if there's a year between those carries and the next. You can get that same experience in practice going against the first team defense in a scrimmage. Not worth burning a redshirt...especially when he was predicted to be a backup this year anyway.
DeleteI don't remember him being jittery, but I guess it's possible. He's a very high-energy runner with lots of moving parts. He might look jittery because of his running style, but if that's what you're looking at, then he's probably going to look jittery for the rest of his career.
DeleteRegarding the burned redshirt - They were looking for a guy that fit their ideal of a primary back. At that point Fitz wasn't entirely proven, and even if he was I think they wanted another contingency option to the oft-injured sophomore. Smith, Shaw, and Hopkins came with obvious limitations. Rawls needed to show what he could do. It wasn't about who could fill in during garbage time, it was about finding options for primary back duties during the conference schedule.
ReplyDeleteIn hindsight it looks like a wasted year of eligibility, but I'm not going to sweat the burned red-shirt for a running back. Red-shirts rarely helps you much at the position. Anyway, three years from now we should have enough recruiting talent coming in to not miss Rawls.
If the coaches were looking for a primary back option, Rawls and Fitz would have split carries during the meaningful parts of the games...especially Eastern. This is not what happened.
DeleteI do agree that we have enough running back talent coming in (especially if we pull in Green) that this wasted redshirt won't be felt.
I don't think they had entirely ruled out Hopkins, Shaw, or Smith at that point and weren't going to red-shirt an option like Rawls unless a primary guy emerged. Knowing what they know now - Fitz would have been the primary back from the outset, but that wasn't obvious to anyone early last fall.
DeleteI don't think Rawls needed to show what he could do. Like I said, running backs don't need experience to play well. They can come in out of nowhere and get the job done. Shaw and Smith were already somewhat proven, and Toussaint (in my opinion) is the best pure runner on the team. You can take what you know of Shaw and Smith, play the best runner in Toussaint, and then toss in Rawls/Hayes if you need them. Rawls wasn't needed.
DeleteThe redshirt may not help down the road...but it might. It's good to at least have the option. I'm not upset about the burned redshirt because I somewhat agree that it won't affect Michigan a great deal. But you never know what might happen. It's nice to keep options open.
@Thunder
DeleteEasy to say now, but remember that last Sept things weren't as clear. At the time people were still thinking Shaw was one of the primary backs. By the end of the season it was obvious (to everyone) that Fitz was the man - but in Sept? He won the starting job and did well against Western, but he didn't play against ND because he was hurt (again!). He wasn't well established yet and he certainly didn't appear to be a guy they could count on for the rest of the season.
So, they knew they needed another guy and given how marginalized Shaw was by the end of the season it seems like they might have an idea that it wasn't him. I think they were sure it wasn't Smith. Those two were very proven - but proven to not be the kind of back these coaches wanted... and so I think they were looking in Hopkins and Rawls direction. It's not about Rawls being NEEDED - obviously he wasn't, in hindsight. But what if Toussaint got hurt and missed the rest of the year. Was it back to the Smith/Shaw show that proved ineffective over the last couple years? Was it on to Hopkins and his fumbling/lack of elusiveness? It's about the coaches finding what they wanted at RB. Besides, they were already red-shirting Hayes and had several recruiting irons going as well. And yeah, you can argue Rawls could have been saved until Toussaint was hurt but a) he was the week before EMU and b) the coaches may have wanted to get some jitters out and see what he does in game situations. Bottom line is that they liked him and thought he MIGHT be needed in 2011. He wasn't, it turns out, but they didn't know that then.
To me, the non-redshirt is one of those things that yeah - it could have worked out better. It would be nice to have the option to keep a guy for his 5th year. Knowing everything we know now, that would have been the more optimal choice... but if you travel back in time it was a reasonable decision with a low probability that anything substantial would be lost to the program. It could hurt - but it probably won't.
I think as fans it's easy to look at the production (or lackthereof) and say "ARGH wasted red-shirt", but in most cases I think coaches make the right decision. They have to address injury risk, have contingency plans ready in place, and manage personalities. It's not as simple as did he play enough to warrant giving up the 5th year option.
I had serious doubts about Rawls' ability and his recruiting profile, but I'm coming around slowly. I'm very encouraged by him winning the backup primary back job (though the competition isn't exactly fantastic) and view the coaches early confidence to play him last year as an encouraging sign as well.
DeleteI'm not sure if he'll be a big play guy or not, but it'd be nice to have a reliable tough runner to hammer teams and spare Toussaint from some hits. Hopkins seemed like he might be that guy but he proved a little unreliable and a better fit at FB.