- Messages
- 16,041
- Reaction score
- 5,491
'12 IL DT Tommy Schutt (Ohio State Verbal)
- Thread starter neoroks32
- Start date
rtrn2glory
Well-known member
- Messages
- 16,163
- Reaction score
- 6,450
idk if bennet's hurt, but he's a good one so if he beat him out that's pretty good.
Ironman8
Jaqen H'ghar
- Messages
- 11,652
- Reaction score
- 902
I'm assuming he is hurt, but it is still impressive that he is ready to get the call. UCF is not a cupcake.
Irish Houstonian
New member
- Messages
- 2,722
- Reaction score
- 301
Sometimes I wish I could turn my hindsight goggles off...
I will tell you why they didn't take him but should have just like they should have taken Mcnamara. Their recruiting strategy was that they thought they were going to have a great year and they wanted to hold open spots. We know how that worked out. This year they have obviously changed their strategy and maybe they take him this year. But remember also that other teams passed on Schutt too and that didn't seem to make sense. So did UM and I think maybe some other teams did too. Maybe there was some other strange issue we don't know about.
Bennett is hurt. Groin injury.
woolybug25
#1 Vineyard Vines Fan
- Messages
- 17,677
- Reaction score
- 3,018
NDinFL
New member
- Messages
- 2,946
- Reaction score
- 278
Lax is going to start drinking bleach after reading that
sounds like a Cwynar/IWilliams kind of NT/DT.
AdmiralBackhand
Wir sind wir
- Messages
- 2,962
- Reaction score
- 388
Line him up against our line and they will eat pancakes.
woolybug25
#1 Vineyard Vines Fan
- Messages
- 17,677
- Reaction score
- 3,018
Do you mean in style of player?
I'm just talking out loud. I seem to have lost control of my inner monologue.
woolybug25
#1 Vineyard Vines Fan
- Messages
- 17,677
- Reaction score
- 3,018
What reason was that? He is good enough to be slotted to start at DT for an OSU team that went undefeated last year. He would be in our two deep this year.
NDinFL
New member
- Messages
- 2,946
- Reaction score
- 278
I'm assuming there were academic issues, and/or character issues.
If I recall correctly, once Day committed, we actually told Schutt "no"
- Messages
- 27,769
- Reaction score
- 10,145
I don't have an answer but schools dropped him quite quickly over something. IIRC, we weren't even the first to do so. We were going to get his commitment then backed away.
greyhammer90
the drunk piano player
- Messages
- 16,819
- Reaction score
- 16,078
When Urban Meyer seems to be the only coach in all of Christendom that will take a kid, I call that a red flag.
If they were character issues, they may have been worked out by Meyer and he may have gotten a steal, but it was obviously enough to scare our coaching staff away.
woolybug25
#1 Vineyard Vines Fan
- Messages
- 17,677
- Reaction score
- 3,018
He had actionable offers to Vanderbilt and Northwestern. So I don't think it was academic. Whatever it was that scared teams off, wasn't athletic either. The kid is going to be a boss. Taking the reasoning out of the picture, we would be in a lot better position on the field today with him in the lineup.
Maybe Urbie covered something up, but I never heard any rumors of legal problems either
IMO, I think the staff thought that he was more of a 4-3 DT and that the commitment of Day and hopes of Vanderdoesn't... we didn't need him. Many people even claimed earlier in the thread that the staff told Day that he needed to commit or he would lose his spot to Schutt. I don't know how much, if any, truth is to that though.
woolybug25
#1 Vineyard Vines Fan
- Messages
- 17,677
- Reaction score
- 3,018
Also, just so you know that my bump wasn't a troll, there was a conversation in the Nyles Morgan thread about how we handle the Chicagoland recruiting. I brought up Schutt and just wanted to bring that convo to a more appropriate thread. I think the conversation is a good one and worth discussion.
The Vanderdoes situation has nothing to do with Schutt. Vanderdoes was a signing day bonus and the staff lucked into that. The problem is only targeting 4 DL in the last two classes in Day, Jones, Matuska and Rochell.
Staff needs to focus on DL like they have OL in the next two cycles and sign 8-9. If they do that then things will right itself just fine.
Staff needs to focus on DL like they have OL in the next two cycles and sign 8-9. If they do that then things will right itself just fine.
Old Man Mike
Fast as Lightning!
- Messages
- 8,959
- Reaction score
- 6,450
Tommy Schutt is going to be a good college football player, and could have been part of our back-up defensive line plan for 2013 here at Notre Dame. Why anyone would want to dispute that makes no sense. It is unlikely however that he would have played much if at all next year { Lou, Stephon, Sheldon --- aka the best DLine in the nation --- and Kona and Tony to fill the DT reps with several studs to help at DE }.
The question is: how significant would he be in 2014? To begin with, that sort of crystal ball gazing is a lot to expect out of Coach and the staff. We still have some DLine power left, and with Stephon or even Lou as possibilities way back when Tommy's recruitment was going on [and Aaron], with Chase healthy, who was to say that we'd be thin there? Almost all the conversation then was that we absolutely needed one elite DT and Sheldon was the prime choice. That choice has since been proven a solid decision.
So the only real debate might be, should we have taken BOTH Sheldon and Tommy? People can defend either view, but it is pretty unfair if that debate [assuming it embeds a criticism of the staff] is based upon things other than the circumstances that Kelly et al saw at the time.
Sheldon appears to be heading for a great Notre Dame career. The data so far seems to indicate that it will be better than Schutt's. Tommy seems heading for a good OSU career. If it wasn't at OSU I'd freely say "atta boy, Tommy! Give it he!l!".
The question is: how significant would he be in 2014? To begin with, that sort of crystal ball gazing is a lot to expect out of Coach and the staff. We still have some DLine power left, and with Stephon or even Lou as possibilities way back when Tommy's recruitment was going on [and Aaron], with Chase healthy, who was to say that we'd be thin there? Almost all the conversation then was that we absolutely needed one elite DT and Sheldon was the prime choice. That choice has since been proven a solid decision.
So the only real debate might be, should we have taken BOTH Sheldon and Tommy? People can defend either view, but it is pretty unfair if that debate [assuming it embeds a criticism of the staff] is based upon things other than the circumstances that Kelly et al saw at the time.
Sheldon appears to be heading for a great Notre Dame career. The data so far seems to indicate that it will be better than Schutt's. Tommy seems heading for a good OSU career. If it wasn't at OSU I'd freely say "atta boy, Tommy! Give it he!l!".
woolybug25
#1 Vineyard Vines Fan
- Messages
- 17,677
- Reaction score
- 3,018
Only Day (and I think he fits better at DE) can play NT in a 3-4 out of those you listed. They also recruited Vanderdoes solidly until the end. They didn't just randomly get him at the end of the process. That was a lot of time and work in the making (time we could have used to visit kids locally in Chicagoland and possibly build a relationship with them).
So there are two convos here that I want to clarify:
1) DT recruiting and how that effected the recruitment of Schutt
and more importantly
2) Why we haven't been that successful recruiting the 100 mile halo of Chicago since before Weis? We have always recruited nationally, but held down Chicago for over a 100 years until Weis. Now we are seeing schools like scUM clean up IL and 5 star NT's like Schutt end up OSU.
Both are interesting topics if you ask me.
Last edited:
STLDomer
Schmitty
- Messages
- 9,426
- Reaction score
- 549
Very much disagree w/ that
Why would you disagree? We weren't in it with Vanderdoes at all until early January and then recruited the heck out of him for the last month. He was not really being counted on until the last weeks into signing day. It was a bonus that we got him.
What is disappointing to me is we only signed two DL after we did the previous year. Hoping that never happens again.
Old Man Mike
Fast as Lightning!
- Messages
- 8,959
- Reaction score
- 6,450
You are correct, Wooly, both topics are of interest.
I know nothing about our Chicago conundrum, but I believe that for Schutt/Day's cycle, the staff thought we were OK with one, and the huge holes we had in top quality DBs [on paper at least] and slightly less so in other weak areas, turned their heads elsewhere in the spending of the scholarships.
When the enormity of the DLine depth problem began crystallizing through things like urgent need for back-up NT, we saw Kona Schwenke be required to bulk up, and Tony Springmann learn the meathouse work to give us a 1-2-3 punch. Looking forward with the sudden awareness that Nix and Tuitt were so @#&# good that they'd be gone in 2014, the staff tried hard in 2012s recruiting cycle and got two guys solidly, and a temporary savior in Vanderdoes. Then THAT happened.
The staff, not being idiots, offered almost every really good DT prospect in sight for the 2013 cycle [including tough pulls like Khairi Clark]. They seem to have gotten Hayes and Trumbetti and the young late-bloomer fellow that I can't name this moment, and if Holley comes along and perhaps Solomon Thomas, that will constitute an elite totality of pieces which includes three potential DTs. The wounds will be healed.
I believe that there is ample evidence that the staff have been making intelligent best-guess choices all along. The fact that life does always cooperate is, well, life.
I know nothing about our Chicago conundrum, but I believe that for Schutt/Day's cycle, the staff thought we were OK with one, and the huge holes we had in top quality DBs [on paper at least] and slightly less so in other weak areas, turned their heads elsewhere in the spending of the scholarships.
When the enormity of the DLine depth problem began crystallizing through things like urgent need for back-up NT, we saw Kona Schwenke be required to bulk up, and Tony Springmann learn the meathouse work to give us a 1-2-3 punch. Looking forward with the sudden awareness that Nix and Tuitt were so @#&# good that they'd be gone in 2014, the staff tried hard in 2012s recruiting cycle and got two guys solidly, and a temporary savior in Vanderdoes. Then THAT happened.
The staff, not being idiots, offered almost every really good DT prospect in sight for the 2013 cycle [including tough pulls like Khairi Clark]. They seem to have gotten Hayes and Trumbetti and the young late-bloomer fellow that I can't name this moment, and if Holley comes along and perhaps Solomon Thomas, that will constitute an elite totality of pieces which includes three potential DTs. The wounds will be healed.
I believe that there is ample evidence that the staff have been making intelligent best-guess choices all along. The fact that life does always cooperate is, well, life.
Last edited:
I think Chicago just does not have a lot of talent anymore. TJ has said on II that the staff is fighting negative recruiting in the area, especially in the Crete-Monee and Plainfield areas (Treadwell, Standifer and Clifton Garrett areas). I would rather have talent come from the Carolinas and the ACC region anyway.
Something must have happened w Schutt in regards to the staff backing off him. I trust the staff in that regard. Michigan and Florida backed off too.
STLDomer
Schmitty
- Messages
- 9,426
- Reaction score
- 549
You said we lucked into him in your original post. I very much disagree with that.