Holy Schneikes
Footballguy
It's bye week season. A few guys on bye, maybe a guy or two injured and Michael is looking like a decent option. At least for me. Could get you zippy, but so could a lot of other options.
I have to say, a ballsy move putting him into your lineup with that offense and 2 carries on the year. Surely some of you have better options.
A broken clock is right twice a day.If FBG "upgrade" him any more in their weekly upgrades downgrades they will need to make a new category...I'm a little disappointed Tomlinson didn't list him in his top 5 RB's this week.
Yes, some of us have better options.I have to say, a ballsy move putting him into your lineup with that offense and 2 carries on the year. Surely some of you have better options.
Running back production is incredibly thin this year. I'm glad I don't have to start him, but would feel okay doing it if I had to.Yes, some of us have better options.I have to say, a ballsy move putting him into your lineup with that offense and 2 carries on the year. Surely some of you have better options.
Some of us are not a part of that some (unless you count Andrews and Karlos Williams as better options this week. Maybe Andrews is, but that's says 'nuff
This.Running back production is incredibly thin this year. I'm glad I don't have to start him, but would feel okay doing it if I had to.Yes, some of us have better options.I have to say, a ballsy move putting him into your lineup with that offense and 2 carries on the year. Surely some of you have better options.
Some of us are not a part of that some (unless you count Andrews and Karlos Williams as better options this week. Maybe Andrews is, but that's says 'nuff
If he gets the start, I think he's got a decent shot at a TD, which makes for a decent day.I have to say, a ballsy move putting him into your lineup with that offense and 2 carries on the year. Surely some of you have better options.![]()
Even if he does end up getting the start, he's still likely splitting with two other guys, and they'll probably all struggle to some extent given the lack of a credible passing threat. If Michael is going to have a big impact in FF, it'll be at the end of the year when Romo and Dez are back.
That happened with Latavius Murray last year, a whole season of (sorry) whining and begging and Sparq scores ad nauseum.... and then Boom, 90 yards!I want to see this dude break a 75 yard TD Sunday just for the reaction in this thread.
I think the IND/NE game thread instantly grew by 2 1/2 pages within 30 seconds after the 4th down play. I agree a huge play by Michael would probably double this thread within minutes. Now, we don't have long to wait to find out....I want to see this dude break a 75 yard TD Sunday just for the reaction in this thread.
I'd be more confident with him than Abdullah. No doubt about it.With byes, he's in at flex over Abdullah. Not very confident.
That is definitely true. Just giving a gauge that I pretty much don't have a choice, lol.I'd be more confident with him than Abdullah. No doubt about it.With byes, he's in at flex over Abdullah. Not very confident.
Yeah, I have him in over Spiller,Abdullah and Sproles right now.That is definitely true. Just giving a gauge that I pretty much don't have a choice, lol.I'd be more confident with him than Abdullah. No doubt about it.With byes, he's in at flex over Abdullah. Not very confident.
CM is high risk high reward. Chance he's worthless in a week or two and a good chance at that. But has an opportunity to be the lead dog in a potent offense.Abdullah or c michael moving forward?
After losing Charles, my RB2 is: Michael, Crowell, Coleman, Riddick, Andrews, Allen. So I will be rolling with him this week.I have to say, a ballsy move putting him into your lineup with that offense and 2 carries on the year. Surely some of you have better options.
You have angered the Fantasy Gods. I haven't seen that sad of a group of RBs since I had to start Jackie Battle and Kevin Smith.After losing Charles, my RB2 is: Michael, Crowell, Coleman, Riddick, Andrews, Allen. So I will be rolling with him this week.I have to say, a ballsy move putting him into your lineup with that offense and 2 carries on the year. Surely some of you have better options.
And Dallas' line is unable to create said holes...guess this is a nonstarter.Objective observer here with the ability to acquire...I just watched Michael's highlights but came away unimpressed. Many big hole runs which resulted in celebratory dancing but seemingly lacking the finish of good RBs. ITS any reasoning why you so enthusiastically support him?
I'm sorry you missed out on him ... better luck next timeObjective observer here with the ability to acquire...I just watched Michael's highlights but came away unimpressed. Many big hole runs which resulted in celebratory dancing but seemingly lacking the finish of good RBs. ITS any reasoning why you so enthusiastically support him?
His talent is insane.Objective observer here with the ability to acquire...I just watched Michael's highlights but came away unimpressed. Many big hole runs which resulted in celebratory dancing but seemingly lacking the finish of good RBs. ITS any reasoning why you so enthusiastically support him?
I just want to see him get the start and see what he does. Is he worth keeping? Give him a shot.I'm not planning on starting him right away (barring some crazy Gurley-esque practice reports where people are buzzing that he's lighting up the joint in practice and is a must start). FF is in large part about avoiding risk and the first game out of the bye with no proven track record is too risky if there are other options. Dude has always been playoff lottery ticket until proven otherwise...just glad that we might actually have a "pre" playoff lottery situation developing instead.
I get the measurables but why did your team give him up so cheaply?His talent is insane.Objective observer here with the ability to acquire...I just watched Michael's highlights but came away unimpressed. Many big hole runs which resulted in celebratory dancing but seemingly lacking the finish of good RBs. ITS any reasoning why you so enthusiastically support him?
you can only get what people are willing to pay and GMs likely saw that they had a numbers game on their hand with too many rbs and not enough spots so they had limited leverage.I get the measurables but why did your team give him up so cheaply?His talent is insane.Objective observer here with the ability to acquire...I just watched Michael's highlights but came away unimpressed. Many big hole runs which resulted in celebratory dancing but seemingly lacking the finish of good RBs. ITS any reasoning why you so enthusiastically support him?
I understand that but going into his 3rd season they felt the need to acquire Fjax and he apparently couldn't beat out Rawls. It seems like the team didn't see the insane talent translating to the field and intentionally created the numbers game that forced Michael out. Am I missing something ITS?you can only get what people are willing to pay and GMs likely saw that they had a numbers game on their hand with too many rbs and not enough spots so they had limited leverage.I get the measurables but why did your team give him up so cheaply?His talent is insane.Objective observer here with the ability to acquire...I just watched Michael's highlights but came away unimpressed. Many big hole runs which resulted in celebratory dancing but seemingly lacking the finish of good RBs. ITS any reasoning why you so enthusiastically support him?
This is my question also. With Lynch getting older, the fact that they didn't have any desire to keep Michael is a bit concerning. However, the league is full of guys who have been cut and then went on to have great careers. Perhaps he'll be one of them.I understand that but going into his 3rd season they felt the need to acquire Fjax and he apparently couldn't beat out Rawls. It seems like the team didn't see the insane talent translating to the field and intentionally created the numbers game that forced Michael out. Am I missing something ITS?you can only get what people are willing to pay and GMs likely saw that they had a numbers game on their hand with too many rbs and not enough spots so they had limited leverage.I get the measurables but why did your team give him up so cheaply?His talent is insane.Objective observer here with the ability to acquire...I just watched Michael's highlights but came away unimpressed. Many big hole runs which resulted in celebratory dancing but seemingly lacking the finish of good RBs. ITS any reasoning why you so enthusiastically support him?
I'm sure others can/will explain it but for me I really don't care. I know others are much more tied into him and have argued on his behalf for years. I've heard he's not the brighest, didn't work hard enough, absorb the playbook, off the field issues but the talent was never in question. I think the past has some relevance but the present and future situation is much more relevant. He's got the situation he's never had before and it's on him to grab the ball and make some plays....did he realize that this may be his one big chance and decide to dedicate himself? will he get it? I guess we'll see over the next couple weeks. I can't wait...he's my 5th/6th RB on both my squads and I'm more anxious to see how this plays out vs. any other situation.I understand that but going into his 3rd season they felt the need to acquire Fjax and he apparently couldn't beat out Rawls. It seems like the team didn't see the insane talent translating to the field and intentionally created the numbers game that forced Michael out. Am I missing something ITS?you can only get what people are willing to pay and GMs likely saw that they had a numbers game on their hand with too many rbs and not enough spots so they had limited leverage.I get the measurables but why did your team give him up so cheaply?His talent is insane.Objective observer here with the ability to acquire...I just watched Michael's highlights but came away unimpressed. Many big hole runs which resulted in celebratory dancing but seemingly lacking the finish of good RBs. ITS any reasoning why you so enthusiastically support him?
Read my comments from past thread. I'm tired of repeating myself.I get the measurables but why did your team give him up so cheaply?His talent is insane.Objective observer here with the ability to acquire...I just watched Michael's highlights but came away unimpressed. Many big hole runs which resulted in celebratory dancing but seemingly lacking the finish of good RBs. ITS any reasoning why you so enthusiastically support him?
Dude, you finally have someone who cares about your opinion. Don't pass this up.Read my comments from past thread. I'm tired of repeating myself.I get the measurables but why did your team give him up so cheaply?His talent is insane.Objective observer here with the ability to acquire...I just watched Michael's highlights but came away unimpressed. Many big hole runs which resulted in celebratory dancing but seemingly lacking the finish of good RBs. ITS any reasoning why you so enthusiastically support him?
Yeah Im kinda in the boat of getting something for time invested..I think anyone starting him is reaching for points. He could put up 5 FF pts and it would be a good first outing for this dude (but not good for your team this week).
Any player could put up 5 pts this week, but who cares. It's going to be fun watching him on Sunday either way, and that's what it's all about.I think anyone starting him is reaching for points. He could put up 5 FF pts and it would be a good first outing for this dude (but not good for your team this week).
c-mike 40% owned in ESPN, 6% started. i'm a 6 percenterCMike is at 11% start rate on Yahoo (43% owned)
The Byes are hitting everyone (lotta Cincy/GB players owned)
Id suggest some of ya not starting CMike to check Twitter (Sig) is probably suggesting CMike 4 WDIS ?'s
For reference:
Crowell is 52% owned w/ 15% start