bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
Well without russ possibly at nyj im not sure u can start himGood news: C-Mike is finally "the man". Bad news: Seattle offense still has massive issues. Don't let this Niners game fool you
Well without russ possibly at nyj im not sure u can start himGood news: C-Mike is finally "the man". Bad news: Seattle offense still has massive issues. Don't let this Niners game fool you
I think hes an RB1 regardlessWell without russ possibly at nyj im not sure u can start him
I think he was insinuating that the idea that Rawls was being held out for a leg bruise sounded like and that it was likely that Seattle was lying and that the injury was worse that than. And it looks like he was correct.Alleged? What are you insinuating?
I thought the opposite. I thought he was implying there was no injury, that they just pulled him due to performance and said he got a contusion. If that is what he was implying, it was obviously false.I think he was insinuating that the idea that Rawls was being held out for a leg bruise sounded like and that it was likely that Seattle was lying and that the injury was worse that than. And it looks like he was correct.
Yeah, if Rawls were healthy there is no way he would have been inactive.I thought the opposite. I thought he was implying there was no injury, that they just pulled him due to performance and said he got a contusion. If that is what he was implying, it was obviously false.
Benched him for IngramAnyone benching him this week vs. the Jets front? May sit him down for Coleman, though that isn't that much better of a matchup
My other options are Artis-Payne or RiddickAnyone benching him this week vs. the Jets front? May sit him down for Coleman, though that isn't that much better of a matchup
Agreed. My concern is with their o-line vs. a Jets front that is 3rd in the league vs. the run, giving up only 71.7 yards per game and has already shut down Gio/Hill, McCoy and Ware. Michael is only averaging 2 receptions so that's not a big part of his game. Best case scenario is probably 70 yards and a td. Though I would probably start him over those other twoMy other options are Artis-Payne or Riddick
Both have solid matchups
With a gimpy QB, It'll be the CMac show....riding him all day
90 total yards and a TD. Enjoy your lifejacket...Spiller TD. Abandon ship!
Matchup is good and the weather being bad in Seattle may lead to even more touches for Michael this week. Starting him with confidence this week.
You say this as if it's something new...Bloom really likes him this week.
Indeed, Seattle essentially cut him too (traded for peanuts)Don't understand how Dallas and Washington both cut this guy. He has looked really good so far this year.
Just took a few teams to cut him before a light switch went off in his head.Indeed, Seattle essentially cut him too (traded for peanuts)
Is that why he just got vultured for a TD?Concussion protocol
Don't understand how Dallas and Washington both cut this guy. He has looked really good so far this year.
Of course there is. I won't be surprised in the slightest. If healthy they love Rawls. The big question is if he will be healthy and the same player again.There's no way Rawls gets his job back, right?
I know you're on the anti-Michael train Hoop, but I really don't see why. Your "ten cent head" comment has made an appearance many times in this thread (although it might have gone up in value from two cents to ten now). At any rate, I'd love for you to take a fresh look at him and not judge only by past years.Of course there is. I won't be surprised in the slightest. If healthy they love Rawls. The big question is if he will be healthy and the same player again.
IMO these situations are not analogous. The Seahawks have better DL depth than RB depth; the Seahawks still have Rubin, Reed, and McDaniel at DT even without Hill, whereas at RB they have a veteran player the Seahawks and other teams released just last year and a couple of unproven rookies. Rawls has the potential to regain the RB1 role, which is arguably a role that is more important to the Seahawks than however you would define Hill's role (i.e., DT1, DT2, rotation DT, whatever).I should also note, I realize the coaching staff has said how much they love Rawls and his style. But you have to be able to be on the field and stay on the field. They just released Jordan Hill who I'm sure they loved and thought had a ton of talent, but also couldn't remain healthy.
(Side note, once Hill gets healthy I hope they bring him back.)
Understood. I see the stats, but I worry about the attitude. He flashes the immaturity from time to time that makes me cringe. Saw it yesterday twice. Important question. Does character count in an NFL player? I think certainly it does in a successful NFL locker room. Pete Carroll has created a specific environment in Seattle. Any me-first attitudes are going to be unwelcome. I've never sat down and talked to Michael, but would love to. I've never sat down and talked to the coaches and administration in Seattle, but again I would love to. My impression is that they are currently tolerating Michael. I could certainly be wrong about this.I know you're on the anti-Michael train Hoop, but I really don't see why. Your "ten cent head" comment has made an appearance many times in this thread (although it might have gone up in value from two cents to ten now). At any rate, I'd love for you to take a fresh look at him and not judge only by past years.
I don't think they are "very" different backs, but agree they are somewhat different. I don't have a problem with the talent of either player, but certainly more suspect of the character behind Michael.They are certainly different backs: Rawls will run people over just like Marshawn did and people like it. He's also going to get hurt because he's not going to have the same durability as Lynch. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I just don't think Rawls is the answer. Maybe Michael isn't either. This has the feel of how much we just want another Marshawn and aren't going to get it.
No stink at all. Understand your perspective. If anything I hope Michael continues to flash his talent and win games for Seattle. I worry more about how he will respond when things go poorly, and at some point they will go poorly. How will he respond? Time will tell.Anyway, not trying to create a stink here, just noticing a pattern and I'm wondering if there's something else here...
Question about the bolded as I was at the game and didn't see the broadcast... What did he do? The only thing I saw was after he had a big run early he looked as if he was calming down the crowd. Maybe that was one if he was thinking "don't get excited, I do this all the time!" but that wasn't what I was thinking at that moment.Hooper31 said:Understood. I see the stats, but I worry about the attitude. He flashes the immaturity from time to time that makes me cringe. Saw it yesterday twice. Important question. Does character count in an NFL player? I think certainly it does in a successful NFL locker room. Pete Carroll has created a specific environment in Seattle. Any me-first attitudes are going to be unwelcome. I've never sat down and talked to Michael, but would love to. I've never sat down and talked to the coaches and administration in Seattle, but again I would love to. My impression is that they are currently tolerating Michael. I could certainly be wrong about this.
I don't think they are "very" different backs, but agree they are somewhat different. I don't have a problem with the talent of either player, but certainly more suspect of the character behind Michael.
No stink at all. Understand your perspective. If anything I hope Michael continues to flash his talent and win games for Seattle. I worry more about how he will respond when things go poorly, and at some point they will go poorly. How will he respond? Time will tell.
You should be worried if Rawls comes back at or near 100%. They like him.Can we reassess Michael's value in dynasty and keeper leagues. What does everyone think he role will be next year? Is he a buy, sell, hold at this point. Personally I worry about his role with Rawls and Prosise in the mix now. Thoughts?
The haters shut down the original Christine Michael thread. They have mostly disappeared this year in the Volume 2 thread, but clearly there are a few leftovers that can't help themselves. People are allowed to change their mind and be wrong, but will they? Before this year, the below is how Michael performed. There was nothing stopping him from being a top 5 NFL RB besides the lack of opportunity. Maybe this is his own fault, but in the end, no one can deny this guys talent.You should be worried if Rawls comes back at or near 100%. They like him.
Are you in the Rawls thread or in the Cristine Michael thread? Michael will continue to perform this year and, at BEST, Rawls will eat into Michael's carries late in the season. I know you feel his 7 carries for -7 yards should earn him an automatic start when his leg heals because you own him on your fantasy team, but as I said in my post above, that is not how the NFL works.Are you serious or is this some epic trolling?
Michael was clearly not recovered from his injury and having a downstream 2nd injury is completely common. And that was a serious ankle injury.
Based on the tape, Rawls is clearly a better back. Michael is a great athlete but limited as an RB which is why the Seahawks are excited to have Michael back.
The only way this isn't the Thomas Rawls Show is if he can't recover from his injuries. But if he's back he deserves to be the clear no. 1 RB.
That wouldn't worry you? I see you pointing at 7 for -7. Do you really think that is a fair assessment of Rawls' talent?at BEST, Rawls will eat into Michael's carries late in the season.
Here's to wishful hoping it's not a RBBC when Rawls comes back...mnmplayer said:That wouldn't worry you? I see you pointing at 7 for -7. Do you really think that is a fair assessment of Rawls' talent?
1. What about his lifetime ypc?
2. What about the fact that he was named starter again when he came back from injury to start the year (what has changed to make you think this won't be the case again when he comes back 2nd time?)
3. What about his production last year? You feel the need to tout Michaels last 3 years ypc avg (with so few carries it is meaningless) and yet choose to omit Rawls vastly superior production in 2015, just last year? Why?
4. The poster didn't ask who was better, they just asked should I be worried as a Michael owner. Your response above even admits there are scenarios to worry about, where Rawls will eat into Michael's carries ... getting less than he is now.
Let's take a step back and compare two lifetime stats. Which one looks better?
Guy A: Rushing: 166 carries, 855 yards (5.2 avg) 4 TDs Receiving: 15 rec, 117 yards 7.8 avg 1 TD (1 fumble)
Guy B: Rushing: 203 carries, 903 yards (4.4 avg) 4 TDs Receiving: 22 rec, 118 yards 5.4 avg 1 TD (3 fumbles)
If I was guy A starting and guy B was returning I would not be as worried as if I was guy B and guy A was returning (also knowing guy A was the starter before injury). I also wouldn't be as comfy as Guy B knowing I was already released once from the team that I am playing for and Guy A already surpassed me on the depth chart once and I was released in the same year while I am now under a 1 yr contract where the team could care less about making me happy long term.
You can point to Rawls' 19 carries in 2016 all you want if it makes you sleep at night, but do you really think the team forgot his epic 2015 performance of 5.6 ypc as a starter just last year? If they forgot, why did they pretty much hand the job back to Rawls the first go around? What about Christine's 2016 season as a starter (with a lower 4.2 ypc as compared to his lifetime 4.4 ypc as a backup, spot starter) makes you feel Christine Michael owners should not worry? You use Rawls' 7 for -7 when he went down to injury as your proof that he sux and don't even mention what he did for Sea last year? There is no hate. Take the names away and help explain how Guy B is better than Guy A in ANY meaningful category during their body of work and I'll listen. After waling through this ... I have actually changed my position. Realistically the only chance Michael has of keeping the job he has now is if Rawls isn't right again and remains unhealthy, which is the very reason he is even getting starter snaps in the first place, because Rawls has been unhealthy since his 2015 injury that ended his season.
So let's just say, "If a healthy Rawls is back and anywhere near 100% you shouldn't be any more worried than the last glazed crispy at a Jenny freakin Craig convention."
This means nothing, especially to the Seahawks. That organization starts more undrafted/late round guys that any other team in the league. Where they were drafted means nothing to them, and rightfully so.Who watches more tape, you or the Seahawks paid scouts? Rawls went undrafted, Michael was drafted in round 2 (pick 62). So, on tape, the Seahawks paid professional staff value Michael's collegiate production and talent much, much greater than they ever did Rawls.
Are you referencing some article on this injury or specific knowledge about it?It will take at least 2 weeks from cast removal to walk in a balanced way and no longer overcompensation to the leg that was not broken. In 4 weeks he might have the leg strength of an average person. From there you have to add in time for the athlete to get to an NFL level of strength and conditioning, because if he is not at that level you can be absolutely assured the leg weakness and mental hesitation will lead to a low YPC.
He has looked explosive. But what good is exploding if you're doing so into the backs of your OL or into defenders because you don't have the vision and patience to be an effective RB? Look at Le'Veon Bell. He's the best back in the league. When is the last time someone said he was explosive?Christine Michael's tape speaks for itself at both the NFL and collegiate level. He is the better talent. Take a few minutes and Google the articles on Michael's re-awakening this year and the articles about him looking "shot out of a cannon".
You realize that despite those nice YPCs, the Seahawks released him previously, right? And that he went to DAL and made no impact there, despite their best RB being Darren McFadden? Or that he started the season as the #2 guy behind Rawls, despite the team apparently loving Michael so much?Touchdown There said:but in the end, no one can deny this guys talent.
2013 - 4.4 YPC
2014 - 5.1 YPC
2015 - 4.5 YPC
Michael has greatly outplayed Rawls this year. The talent has officially shined through, not just to the Seahawks, but the the rest of the league. The Seahawks are not going to hinge their wagon to Rawls at the end of the season. They have a goal to win the Super Bowl and that means you play the hot hand, not the guy without "the 10 cent head" or the guy you think they "like" better.