What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Christine Michael (1 Viewer)

Status
Not open for further replies.
cowboys88 said:
Milkman said:
cowboys88 said:
Why u gotta bring up old shiz?
Click to expand...
LOL @ calling out Faust. You do realize he's the single biggest asset on this forum right?
Click to expand...
I'm new here and have no idea who's who, so no. So far though, posting day old articles isn't doing much for me in the news department.
Click to expand...
????

Here is the date stamp on the NFL.com article:

Published: Oct. 2, 2015 at 05:08 p.m.

Updated: Oct. 2, 2015 at 05:18 p.m.

How is that a day old article?

 
from Bryan Broaddus:

  • Jason Garrett continues to field questions about the availability of Christine Michael, and when we might see him on the active game day roster. This was the first week where he actually saw practice snaps with the offense and that was a positive sign. What you need to keep an eye on is when those snaps are equal to or greater than the other backs – he will be in the mix to be active on game day. From what I've been told, this could be Michael's week.
    Click to expand...
Scouts Notebook

 
Perhaps I should have said the information in that article is a day old. It's a rewrite of the same article that was on multiple sights yesterday.

 
cowboys88 said:
Perhaps I should have said the information in that article is a day old. It's a rewrite of the same article that was on multiple sights yesterday.
Click to expand...
Then you post the "latest" information in 50 different threads each day. Faust is great at getting information linked into these threads. It won't always be latest breaking but very helpful when reading up on players you have lost touch with at times.

 
I really want to take the plunge, but don't have the roster spot..unless I drop Mariota who's my backup to Wilson. I'm winless and need a wildcard desperately. Is Rawls a better hold at this point or should I jump aboard the hype train?! Decisions, decisions.

 
I really hate this thread rt now. So little substance, so much garbage.

Can't wait for michael to finally do something so this thread can become a little more bearable.

I'm tied to michael in dynasty and redraft so I unfortunately feel compelled to revisit this putrid string of idiocy every time I see there is a new post on the slight 1% possibility that there will actually be any real information.

:-/

 
Pretty sure I figured out this entire CMike conundrum.

Working at my desk late. Fell asleep when I tilted back in my chair to stretch out and close my eyes. Awoke suddenly after a sort of night terror and yelled, "It's just a ploy to motivate Tatum Bell ! "

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ourmanflint said:
from Bryan Broaddus:

  • Jason Garrett continues to field questions about the availability of Christine Michael, and when we might see him on the active game day roster. This was the first week where he actually saw practice snaps with the offense and that was a positive sign. What you need to keep an eye on is when those snaps are equal to or greater than the other backs – he will be in the mix to be active on game day. From what I've been told, this could be Michael's week.
    Click to expand...
Scouts Notebook
Click to expand...
A mod at a Cowboys forum said he got LESS reps today than wed. I hope he didn't fumble or mess up yesterday.

 
rickyg said:
I really hate this thread rt now. So little substance, so much garbage.

Can't wait for michael to finally do something so this thread can become a little more bearable.

I'm tied to michael in dynasty and redraft so I unfortunately feel compelled to revisit this putrid string of idiocy every time I see there is a new post on the slight 1% possibility that there will actually be any real information.

:-/
Click to expand...
Not sure which would make for better reading....10 for 90 or 10 for 20.

 
Hooper31 said:
Pretty sure I figured out this entire CMike conundrum.

Working at my desk late. Fell asleep when I tilted back in my chair to stretch out and close my eyes. Awoke suddenly after a sort of night terror and yelled, "It's just a ploy to motivate Tatum Bell ! "
Click to expand...
you mean a :yawn: ?
 
I dropped him last week and just picked him back up to protect my Randle investment.

And also because I'd much rather carry him all year and have him do nothing than have him take off right after I drop him.

 
tried so hard to deal randle after last week performance but no one bite, and I was offering him for guys like jarvis landry. I swear half of my league mates must be on this forum.

 
RBM said:
rickyg said:
I really hate this thread rt now. So little substance, so much garbage.

Can't wait for michael to finally do something so this thread can become a little more bearable.

I'm tied to michael in dynasty and redraft so I unfortunately feel compelled to revisit this putrid string of idiocy every time I see there is a new post on the slight 1% possibility that there will actually be any real information.

:-/
Click to expand...
Not sure which would make for better reading....10 for 90 or 10 for 20.
Click to expand...
10 for 900

 
mrbigg said:
tried so hard to deal randle after last week performance but no one bite, and I was offering him for guys like jarvis landry. I swear half of my league mates must be on this forum.
Click to expand...
Guys like Landry? Were you expecting that to get accepted as a no-brainer? I own Landry and no way I would trade him for Randle (it is a far trade offer though, don't get me wrong).

 
RBM said:
rickyg said:
I really hate this thread rt now. So little substance, so much garbage.

Can't wait for michael to finally do something so this thread can become a little more bearable.

I'm tied to michael in dynasty and redraft so I unfortunately feel compelled to revisit this putrid string of idiocy every time I see there is a new post on the slight 1% possibility that there will actually be any real information.

:-/
Click to expand...
Not sure which would make for better reading....10 for 90 or 10 for 20.
Click to expand...
But if he didn't break off that 70 yard run, 10 for 90 would have been 10 for 20.

 
mrbigg said:
tried so hard to deal randle after last week performance but no one bite, and I was offering him for guys like jarvis landry. I swear half of my league mates must be on this forum.
Click to expand...
Regardless of Michael, I suspect the Romo injury and the Mcfadden, Dunbar, etc. presence puts a cap on Randle's value.

 
Ellie826 said:
ourmanflint said:
from Bryan Broaddus:

  • Jason Garrett continues to field questions about the availability of Christine Michael, and when we might see him on the active game day roster. This was the first week where he actually saw practice snaps with the offense and that was a positive sign. What you need to keep an eye on is when those snaps are equal to or greater than the other backs – he will be in the mix to be active on game day. From what I've been told, this could be Michael's week.
    Click to expand...
Scouts Notebook
Click to expand...
A mod at a Cowboys forum said he got LESS reps today than wed. I hope he didn't fumble or mess up yesterday.
Click to expand...
Neither. They were going through the five plays he's managed to memorize

 
Dr. Brew said:
Ellie826 said:
ourmanflint said:
from Bryan Broaddus:

  • Jason Garrett continues to field questions about the availability of Christine Michael, and when we might see him on the active game day roster. This was the first week where he actually saw practice snaps with the offense and that was a positive sign. What you need to keep an eye on is when those snaps are equal to or greater than the other backs he will be in the mix to be active on game day. From what I've been told, this could be Michael's week.
    Click to expand...
Scouts Notebook
Click to expand...
A mod at a Cowboys forum said he got LESS reps today than wed. I hope he didn't fumble or mess up yesterday.
Click to expand...
Neither. They were going through the five plays he's managed to memorize
Click to expand...
More non-news conjecture.

If we're just blasting our opinions out there, I'd say he got less carries bc they need to prepare the starter (Randle) for this week's game.

Giving a guy who likely have to work his way up more reps than guys already well-versed in the playbook would be bad coaching. It's encouraging he got some first team reps. It'll be a slow build from there.

 
DropKick said:
RBM said:
rickyg said:
I really hate this thread rt now. So little substance, so much garbage.

Can't wait for michael to finally do something so this thread can become a little more bearable.

I'm tied to michael in dynasty and redraft so I unfortunately feel compelled to revisit this putrid string of idiocy every time I see there is a new post on the slight 1% possibility that there will actually be any real information.

:-/
Click to expand...
Not sure which would make for better reading....10 for 90 or 10 for 20.
Click to expand...
But if he didn't break off that 70 yard run, 10 for 90 would have been 10 for 20.
Click to expand...
I see what you did here!
 
Don said:
Never seen so much hype for a guy that has done so little. Not worth a roster spot imo
Click to expand...
You are entitled to your opinion. The truth is all rosters have junk at the bottom and I would rather roster a high ceiling guy than a low floor with my last roster spot - 99% of rosters have some junk in their last spot. I will hold a lottery ticket over a guy I know I will never start or be able to trade..

 
Why do so many people act as though CM is the only possible player at the end of a roster with a "high ceiling?"

 
jurb26 said:
Why do so many people act as though CM is the only possible player at the end of a roster with a "high ceiling?"
Click to expand...
Nobody - but don't criticize my lotto ticket over your own. I have already cashed the James Jones ticket and this weekend I will be cashing the Karlos Williams ticket - and next week it's the Michael ticket.

 
jurb26 said:
Why do so many people act as though CM is the only possible player at the end of a roster with a "high ceiling?"
Click to expand...
Nobody acts like that. In fact, all dynasty owners have their own end-of-roster pet projects. For some it's Michael (and the only difference with him is that he was once drafted highly). For others it's Zenner. For others it was Karlos Williams. For others, it's Stefon Diggs or Duron Carter or Brandon Coleman or in the past, Da'Rick Rogers, Devon Wylie, Charles Johnson, Ladarius a Green, Fendi Onobun, Ryan Mallett, etc.These guys always exist, it's not a new thing with Michael. And until they get their opportunity and fail, they usually continue having believers, owners with the bench space to be able to afford to believe in them.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jurb26 said:
Why do so many people act as though CM is the only possible player at the end of a roster with a "high ceiling?"
Click to expand...
Umm...this is the Christine Michael thread. That might have something to do with it in this particular thread.

 
jurb26 said:
Why do so many people act as though CM is the only possible player at the end of a roster with a "high ceiling?"
Click to expand...
Name an end of roster RB with as high ceiling and with so little blocking his opportunity

 
Was going to drop CM to grab my bye week replacement at QB. Now looking like the drop may be Isaiah Crowell.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

JohnnyU
TE Ben Sinnott, WAS
Replies
26
Views
1K
Loipz
L
greenmountaingoat
Ainias Smith-WR- Eagles
Replies
12
Views
624
need2know
need2know
JohnnyU
WR Trey Palmer, TB
Replies
39
Views
2K
ignatiusjreilly
ignatiusjreilly

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top