Thomas Jefferson linebacker Chase Winovich made a verbal commitment to Michigan on Saturday for the most basic of reasons:
He wants to win a national championship.
“I have the best shot at winning a national championship there, with the kids they are bringing in,” he said.
“Academically, it's as great or superior than any other BCS program. Athletically, it's competitive in any sport that it undertakes to do.
“You look at some of the people it has produced, and it has produced some great characters.”
Winovich, a three-star prospect by rivals.com in the Class of 2014, had 21 scholarship offers but recently trimmed his list to Michigan, Ohio State and Pitt. He said he telephoned Pitt offensive coordinator Joe Rudolph and Ohio State co-defensive coordinator Luke Fickel with the news.
“Those were two of the toughest conversations I've ever had,” he said. “Rudolph is one of the greatest coaches, most trustworthy coaches I have met through this process. He said he was disappointed in my decision, but he appreciated the call.”
Winovich called Fickel “one of the greatest linebacker coaches in the United States.”
“It's never an easy process, but I had to do what was best for me,” Winovich said.
The 6-foot-4, 220-pound Winovich said Michigan plans to use him at strongside outside linebacker.
“He's physical, he runs and he finishes plays,” TJ coach Bill Cherpak said. “He has all the tools.”
Pitt has one verbal commitment from the Class of 2014: offensive lineman Connor Hayes of Traverse City, Mich.
Jerry DiPaola is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. Reach him at email@example.com or via Twitter @JDiPaola_Trib.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.