Fort Myers (FL) Bishop Verot quarterback Carter Smith decommitted from Michigan on Wednesday. He had been committed to the Wolverines since June and was doing a good job of spearheading the 2025 class, but circumstances have changed since he pledged to the Wolverines.
Hit the jump for more.
A lot of rumors have filtered out in the last couple weeks about Michigan's increased intensity in recruiting Belleville (MI) Belleville quarterback Bryce Underwood. Underwood has been committed to LSU, and it's hard to blame him based on the offenses in Baton Rouge under Joe Burrow, Jayden Daniels, and Garrett Nussmeier; even though Burrow played for a previous regime, there's still a program standard that exists of having good quarterback play.
But Underwood's home-state Wolverines need a quarterback badly, and they need one right now (or, well, in 2025). Michigan can't go into next season with Davis Warren, Alex Orji, and a true freshman battling for playing time, unless that true freshman is a superstar . . . and even then, it would be nice to have a proven veteran option. Smith is a 4-star, the #14 quarterback, and #158 overall, so he's no slouch.
Underwood is the #1 player overall.
The real crux of the issue is that Underwood is obviously an NIL magnet as the top quarterback in the class. Rumors are flying about his being offered $4 million or $5 million. While I'm not qualified to comment on what kind of NIL packages are being offered, Michigan's not going to be able to land someone like Underwood for chump change.
And if Underwood is being offered lots of money by Michigan, how does that compare to what Smith is/was being offered? I can certainly see where a small "contract" or an offer to be "transformational, not transactional" would be seen as a little bit insulting or demeaning. Even if it's not, when you have one guy in the QB room with a huge payout and another guy without much of a salary is an untenable situation. This is one of the many problems with NIL and its lack of regulation. What do NFL teams do in situations where they have a 1st round rookie QB and a lowly paid veteran? They almost always play the higher paid guy because they need to see what they have or at least give him a chance.
And that's made even murkier with NIL, because there's no owner attached to the team who's paying the bills - it's random donors, who may not donate NIL in the future if you don't play the guy they want.
So . . . here we are. Michigan has no additions slated for the QB room for 2025. They have to land Underwood, or if they receive a firm "no," they have to try to re-attract Smith. Furthermore, they have to be active in the transfer portal and try to land an elite quarterback. After a year of extremely underwhelming play, Michigan needs to try to overcorrect by throwing in at least 2-3 new options for next season.
CFB is changing a lot and probably not for the better.
ReplyDeleteI think there are plenty of examples out there of leagues that operate in a free market and that's essentially what we have now. If you look at international soccer for example -- a lot of young talent just goes to the highest bidder (richest franchises), after factoring in whatever family/language considerations they might have for staying in their home country/state/city.
I'm certainly no NIL expert but it seems like the collectives are a bigger deal here than random donors. But both are relevant so it's going to be impossible to track for not only fans but also schools, to figure out what the true market value is of these guys. It's the wild west until things are more regulated and/or more mature. It'll settle eventually but either way you'll have to spend more on players to compete with the elites (like the Yankees and Dodgers in MLB).
---------------------------------------------
FWIW
I am in the camp that thinks throwing $5M at a blue chip recruit is a very bad use of $5M. That $ could be spent on relative sure things in the Portal. It's just too risky to use it on a high school kid because you never know if you're getting JJ McCarthy or Shane Morris.
As for the last paragraph, I don't really agree with the framing here. Underwood will be an early enrollee and make a decision in a few weeks. Once that's done, you reassess. If you've got $5M laying around and a gaping depth chart vacancy in December, that's a different recruiting approach than if Underwood is in the fold. That $5M can buy you a pretty good Portal QB, or maybe flip a different highly rated recruit. Likely both, honestly.
But if Underwood is in AA, you aren't going after an elite QB in the portal anymore. Nobody elite is coming to AA to get passed over for the $5M man. You're looking at future coaches, insurance policy types (like Bowman and Tuttle).
I do think there will be 3 new faces in the QB room in 2025 but I wouldn't call it an over-correction. With or without Underwood, I would expect additional departures from the roster besides Tuttle.
Regarding the dynamics of NIL in this day and age ... I wonder to what degree the push for Underwood is coming from the program itself, and how much is being driven by monied interests outside Schembechler Hall? If from outside, then this illustrates yet another facet of NIL that's a bit troubling: by making noise about throwing large amounts of money at players, it's possible to disrupt the commitments of other players. Is that what's happening? Who knows?
ReplyDeleteHere's a very serious question: does Bryce Underwood even fit within the general offensive scheme Michigan is trying to run? Or is this push for him more about the fact he's the #1 QB, and that alone is the key factor?
He's the #1 recruit in the country and has been considered an elite prospect for several years. Is there any reason to think he doesn't fit the scheme?
DeleteMoreover, if he does not fit, wouldn't it be worth adapting for a talent like him? Kind of a different situation here, than with a walk-on and a 3 star, neither of which they trust to throw downfield more than 3 or 4 times a game, right?
I agree that if you have a shot at the #1 in the county, and you land him, then you build things around that ... but up to a point. If he was a air raid gun-slinger type QB, then do you conform that much to fit him?
DeleteAt any rate, the deeper question is how much the Michigan coaches are lobbying for him. Is this mostly them coordinating the sale? Or is this Portnoy flashing his cash around, and the coaches standing on the sidelines watching the thing go down?
I would say yes. If you have a gunslinger -- you use that part of the playbook and expand off of it, to make a more coherent gameplan. Ditto if you have an impact runner (like Denard) -- you use that part of the playbook and expand off of it.
DeleteIf you have the talent, you adapt to it. If you don't, then you run your system and hope people can step up.
------------------------------
The insiders are not saying Portnoy is a factor here. I would not trust a guy who profits off attention and notoriety to provide a legitimate perspective.
If you recall back in February -- Moore emphasized high school recruiting in his first weeks on the job. Insiders are saying he has a good relationship with Underwood and his family.
I don't love the approach here, but Moore seems to think elevating high school recruiting is a priority. Maybe we are not quite at OSU/Georgia/Alabama/Oregon levels but we are probably in the second tier. And if you can pair that with some differentiated identity (for Harbaugh this was TE-heavy/run-first/turnover avoidance) you can end up within range.
As some indicator of the coaches perspective here is that regardless of QB, Harbaugh's 2022 class had 5 top 150 composite recruits and his 2023 class had one top 150 recruit. Moore's 2025 class has 5 commits so far, and tracking towards,uh, more, by signing day.
DeleteI think it's safe to assume that Michigan has changed their approach in high school recruiting. Changes in the NIL and head coach are contributing to this change.
I concur with Lank. I do not think it is wise spending money on HS QB. I too prefer spending it on portal QB and getting a good HS QB like Smith. Moreover, we are not going to be a QB friendly school, given the offense that we run under Moore. I would rather spend the money on a game manager QB plus a couple of good linemen, rather than a “stud” QB. Money is not limitless so money spent on a stud QB means less money on other position.
ReplyDeleteThe coaches who succeed in Michigan is a “‘money-ball” coach that can exploit market inefficiencies. Beilein and Harbaugh are such coaches. This is because Michigan is never going to outspend top tier SEC schools, Ohio or Oregon. It is early for Moore but his talent evaluation this year has been terrible, not just players but also asst coaches.
2023 team had several great examples of market inefficiencies. A TE from Indiana who was a captain made a massive difference, even on a team with Colston Loveland. Bargain cost, tremendous benefit.
DeleteReliable starting CB from UMass. 6th year OL from Stanford. Under the radar backup Edge fro Coastal Carolina. Freshman LB from Nebraska.
None of these guys cost anywhere near $5M but they all made a big impact.
QB is the most important position but everyone knows that and you won't find any bargains in either the top 5 recruits out of HS or the portal. I think you can get by with fringe veterans (NFL practice squad types) like Speight and Rudock and be alright if your OL and Defense are top 10 caliber.
I don't think Michigan has ever been a place that puts up big passing stats but we have consistently been able to get great talents going back to Henson/Brady, to Henne and Denard, to Morris, Patterson and JJ. A lot of guys are more interested in prestige and profile and winning than they are putting up volume stats. I think this concern is dramatically overstated, but yes it does put us at a disadvantage relative to Oregon or OSU or LSU or Tenn.
This hurts more long-term than near. We are experiencing what it's like to miss or even ignore a QB in a recruiting class(es) ... But even with no chance at starting next year (despite probably being our best passer), this does make our Portal need even greater & more urgent
ReplyDeleteI have no idea what going on with Underwood. Is it just smoke? If he's coming, is the NIL collective or pushed by mega donors? No idea, and part of why I don't like the current system. If this is a program deal, then sure: consider our Run first, Run often Offense and invest in the parts around QB, not only (or mainly) QB. But if big donors are making the call, then F it: go all in on Underwood. He'll have to start next year (ready or not), but hopefully be more Dylan Raiola than DJ Ugalailiiii
I think Smith had a pretty decent chance of starting TBH. Until we get a better player from the portal the position is wide open for anyone, even a freshman.
DeleteFWIW, Uiagalelei had a 146 passer rating as a freshman (in 117 attempts) and is at 128 for his career, while contributing 1124 rushing yards and 21 TDs on the ground. Raiola has a 130 passer rating (in 272 attempts) while being one dimensional. Starter is tougher than backup but Raiola hasn't exactly been an amazing freshman like Jalen Hurts, Caleb Williams or Shedeur Sanders were.
For as disappointing as DJ U's career has ended up being relative to the hype, he had a couple of good seasons for Clemson and Oregon State.
Honestly I think we win a couple more games if he was Michigan's QB in 2024 if he had been managed like Orji and Warren have been (and like DJ was in 2023 at ORegon State..)
At the same time, DJ U and Raiola are 5-star QBs. That tells you why anyone expecting Underwood to come in and be an impact guy as a freshman is probably very optimistic thinking. The odds if him being like Hurts/Williams/Sanders are not very good.