Christine Michael (2 Viewers)

[EBF]

Breaking ankles: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3V3JiOhFOxA

 

[buck naked]

Breaking ankles: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3V3JiOhFOxA

I'll make sure to draft him on my fantasy football practice team.

 

[tdmills]

Breaking ankles:

:smh: y'all are getting hyped over a play in practice wearing shells...come on. Its basically flag football. Of course you can dance around when your not going to get drilled.

Also how long did frank gore last with all those carries?

 

[Xue]

Breaking ankles:

How many 220+ pounders are making those jukes? Probably Doug Martin, that's it.

 

[Gandalf]

My favorite target in every dynasty league this year

 

[Milkman]

Breaking ankles: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3V3JiOhFOxA

Nice. Just needs an opportunity.........

 

[Neofight]

Seahawks RBs coach Sherman Smith does not anticipate Marshawn Lynch's workload lessening in 2014.

"To me, there's a drop off (behind Lynch)," Smith said. "You take Marshawn out of the game, there's a drop off to the next guy. So why would we do that?" The Seahawks are going to ride Lynch until his wheels fall off, which history suggests will happen sooner rather than later. Including playoffs, he has 1,002 carries over the last three seasons (334 per year). Lynch turned 28 in April.

Yet another indication of the gross overvaluing of Michael going on in the dynasty world.

What do you want them to say?Something along the lines of:

"Yeah, we plan on running Lynch into the ground this year because we plan on cutting him next year and don't have a vested interest in his future health. I could say that we have talented backups, but that would cast doubt on our motivations for overusing Lynch and provide a dis-incentive to our backups to work harder."?

I don't think that quote has any bearing on the underlying reality of the situation. Which isn't to say Michael isn't overrated.

Even if they planned on cutting him next year, why would they need to "run him into the ground" unless they really thought "there's a drop off"?

It seems that you are suggesting they have some devious plan, and aren't actually trying to win football games - Are they saving Michael (or Turbin) for the future? Would they get so worn out for 2015 if they handled backup carries in 2014.

Its seems the guy really beleives Lynch is their best RB and the team is better off with him on the field.

You come across as surprised by this revelation. Lynch is one of the 3 or 4 best running backs in the NFL. Of course they want him on the field.

 

[jomar]

Breaking ankles:

Practice? We're talking about practice? Not a game, not a game......We're talkin about practice.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

My favorite target in every dynasty league this year

why? you are massively over paying right now, if you really want him wait until he does nothing, again, this year

 

[ebsteelers]

so at texas a&m he never broke a 1000 yards in a season or a 170 carries in a year.

15 catches the most he had in a year..... and the hype train is still running down the 40, the 30, the 20, the 10......

 

[The Man With No Name]

so at texas a&m he never broke a 1000 yards in a season or a 170 carries in a year.

15 catches the most he had in a year..... and the hype train is still running down the 40, the 30, the 20, the 10......

He did way more than Frank Gore did in college.

181 more carries

816 more rushing yards

17 more rushing touchdowns

21 more receptions

 

[BigSteelThrill]

so at texas a&m he never broke a 1000 yards in a season or a 170 carries in a year.

15 catches the most he had in a year..... and the hype train is still running down the 40, the 30, the 20, the 10......

He did way more than Frank Gore did in college.

181 more carries

816 more rushing yards

17 more rushing touchdowns

21 more receptions

Wat?

Michael played an extra season over Gore. And one of those seasons of Gores was cut to 5 games; blown out knee in spring.

The year after knee surgery he ran for more yards then Michael ever did in a season.

He also had Clinton Portis and Willis McGahee on his team.

Gore averaged a half more yard per carry over his career.

Pump up Michael all you want, but pulling back the curtain that's a bad statistical comparison to use.

 

[ghostguy123]

Seahawks RBs coach Sherman Smith does not anticipate Marshawn Lynch's workload lessening in 2014.
"To me, there's a drop off (behind Lynch)," Smith said. "You take Marshawn out of the game, there's a drop off to the next guy. So why would we do that?" The Seahawks are going to ride Lynch until his wheels fall off, which history suggests will happen sooner rather than later. Including playoffs, he has 1,002 carries over the last three seasons (334 per year). Lynch turned 28 in April.

Yet another indication of the gross overvaluing of Michael going on in the dynasty world.

What do you want them to say?

Something along the lines of:

"Yeah, we plan on running Lynch into the ground this year because we plan on cutting him next year and don't have a vested interest in his future health. I could say that we have talented backups, but that would cast doubt on our motivations for overusing Lynch and provide a dis-incentive to our backups to work harder."?

I don't think that quote has any bearing on the underlying reality of the situation. Which isn't to say Michael isn't overrated.

Right, because nobody drafting or trading for Michael to this point expected ANYTHING out of the guy for the 2014 season anyway, barring injury to Lynch.

Shaping up nicely for 2015.

 

[ghostguy123]

Even if they planned on cutting him next year, why would they need to "run him into the ground" unless they really thought "there's a drop off"?

It seems that you are suggesting they have some devious plan, and aren't actually trying to win football games - Are they saving Michael (or Turbin) for the future? Would they get so worn out for 2015 if they handled backup carries in 2014.

Its seems the guy really beleives Lynch is their best RB and the team is better off with him on the field.

Well, duh.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Right, because nobody drafting or trading for Michael to at this point expected ANYTHING out of the guy for the 2014 season anyway, barring injury to Lynch.

That's a long cry from where this thread was last summer.

 

[ghostguy123]

Right, because nobody drafting or trading for Michael to at this point expected ANYTHING out of the guy for the 2014 season anyway, barring injury to Lynch.

That's a long cry from where this thread was last summer.

I took him knowing 2013 was worthless with a very very strong chance 2014 was also worthless. I suppose my team was good enough at that time where I didn't get tempted to take players who I thought would play right away. I am still quite glad I chose Michael. Well worth that late 1st, early 2nd.

If people were drafting him and expecting immediate results, then shame on them. That would be silly.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Right, because nobody drafting or trading for Michael to at this point expected ANYTHING out of the guy for the 2014 season anyway, barring injury to Lynch.

That's a long cry from where this thread was last summer.

I took him knowing 2013 was worthless with a very very strong chance 2014 was also worthless. I suppose my team was good enough at that time where I didn't get tempted to take players who I thought would play right away. I am still quite glad I chose Michael. Well worth that late 1st, early 2nd.

If people were drafting him and expecting immediate results, then shame on them. That would be silly.

That not what THIS THREAD was doing. so ya know.

 

[ghostguy123]

That not what THIS THREAD was doing. so ya know.

ok. I would imagine every thread about every player EVER has some unrealistic expectations for that player.

There was at least a realistic chance that Michael would be the lead back this year either through injury or a Lynch decline or whatever.............but it was unlikely.

There is a LOT of ridiculous things said in this thread from people on the Michael bandwagon and also from the Michael haters.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Even if they planned on cutting him next year, why would they need to "run him into the ground" unless they really thought "there's a drop off"?

It seems that you are suggesting they have some devious plan, and aren't actually trying to win football games - Are they saving Michael (or Turbin) for the future? Would they get so worn out for 2015 if they handled backup carries in 2014.

Its seems the guy really beleives Lynch is their best RB and the team is better off with him on the field.

Well, duh.

That's in response to some one claiming that they are only playing Lynch "to run him into the ground so they can cut him". Yes it seems obvious to me as well that they think Lynch gives them the best chance to win, but that person seemed to think they,re using Lynch to save wear and tear on Michael.

 

[ghostguy123]

Even if they planned on cutting him next year, why would they need to "run him into the ground" unless they really thought "there's a drop off"?

It seems that you are suggesting they have some devious plan, and aren't actually trying to win football games - Are they saving Michael (or Turbin) for the future? Would they get so worn out for 2015 if they handled backup carries in 2014.

Its seems the guy really beleives Lynch is their best RB and the team is better off with him on the field.

Well, duh.

That's in response to some one claiming that they are only playing Lynch "to run him into the ground so they can cut him". Yes it seems obvious to me as well that they think Lynch gives them the best chance to win, but that person seemed to think they,re using Lynch to save wear and tear on Michael.

I dont think they are going to "save" Michael. Anyone suggesting that is reaching.

They will play Lynch as much as possible in close games, or games where the outcome is yet to be decided (anything but blowouts really) for two reasons. One, he is their best RB and one of the better RBs in the league with proven success and a proven track record of being able to handle a large workload. Two, IMO he is LIKELY to not be on the team next year, which is even more incentive to not worry about his workload (in these close games).

Now, in games where the outcome is decided. Let's say Seattle is up 31-7 in the 4th. I think we see Lynch on the bench at that point, and every chance Seattle gets to rest him when they aren't in danger of losing, or if they themselves are getting blown out.

So they are not going to burn Lynch into the ground and risk hurting his contributions later in the season just so they can "save Michael" or just because Lynch won't be there next year. They will want the best out of Lynch in the playoffs when it counts. I think it is going to be a little tricky as far as how they do that.

As far as Michael, "saving him" would be stupid anyway. It would make far more sense to get him as much work as possible for experience if he is going to take over in 2015.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Even if they planned on cutting him next year, why would they need to "run him into the ground" unless they really thought "there's a drop off"?

It seems that you are suggesting they have some devious plan, and aren't actually trying to win football games - Are they saving Michael (or Turbin) for the future? Would they get so worn out for 2015 if they handled backup carries in 2014.

Its seems the guy really beleives Lynch is their best RB and the team is better off with him on the field.

Well, duh.

That's in response to some one claiming that they are only playing Lynch "to run him into the ground so they can cut him". Yes it seems obvious to me as well that they think Lynch gives them the best chance to win, but that person seemed to think they,re using Lynch to save wear and tear on Michael.

I dont think they are going to "save" Michael. Anyone suggesting that is reaching.

They will play Lynch as much as possible in close games, or games where the outcome is yet to be decided (anything but blowouts really) for two reasons. One, he is their best RB and one of the better RBs in the league with proven success and a proven track record of being able to handle a large workload. Two, IMO he is LIKELY to not be on the team next year, which is even more incentive to not worry about his workload (in these close games).

Now, in games where the outcome is decided. Let's say Seattle is up 31-7 in the 4th. I think we see Lynch on the bench at that point, and every chance Seattle gets to rest him when they aren't in danger of losing, or if they themselves are getting blown out.

So they are not going to burn Lynch into the ground and risk hurting his contributions later in the season just so they can "save Michael" or just because Lynch won't be there next year. They will want the best out of Lynch in the playoffs when it counts. I think it is going to be a little tricky as far as how they do that.

As far as Michael, "saving him" would be stupid anyway. It would make far more sense to get him as much work as possible for experience if he is going to take over in 2015.

I agree. I actually think Michael is a talent and will be a very good NFL RB and fantasy asset - it's just that some of the hype and some of the "theories" just seem to go a little overboard sometimes.

 

[Neofight]

Even if they planned on cutting him next year, why would they need to "run him into the ground" unless they really thought "there's a drop off"?

It seems that you are suggesting they have some devious plan, and aren't actually trying to win football games - Are they saving Michael (or Turbin) for the future? Would they get so worn out for 2015 if they handled backup carries in 2014.

Its seems the guy really beleives Lynch is their best RB and the team is better off with him on the field.

Well, duh.

That's in response to some one claiming that they are only playing Lynch "to run him into the ground so they can cut him". Yes it seems obvious to me as well that they think Lynch gives them the best chance to win, but that person seemed to think they,re using Lynch to save wear and tear on Michael.

Who claimed that?

 

[cdubz]

Even if they planned on cutting him next year, why would they need to "run him into the ground" unless they really thought "there's a drop off"?

It seems that you are suggesting they have some devious plan, and aren't actually trying to win football games - Are they saving Michael (or Turbin) for the future? Would they get so worn out for 2015 if they handled backup carries in 2014.

Its seems the guy really beleives Lynch is their best RB and the team is better off with him on the field.

Well, duh.

That's in response to some one claiming that they are only playing Lynch "to run him into the ground so they can cut him". Yes it seems obvious to me as well that they think Lynch gives them the best chance to win, but that person seemed to think they,re using Lynch to save wear and tear on Michael.

I think I am getting mis-characterized here. I was just throwing out a hypothetical on the other extreme to show why they would never say things approaching that side. I think post #1575 lays out my thoughts pretty well, which specifically says I don't believe what you are claiming I think.

 

[Neofight]

Even if they planned on cutting him next year, why would they need to "run him into the ground" unless they really thought "there's a drop off"?

It seems that you are suggesting they have some devious plan, and aren't actually trying to win football games - Are they saving Michael (or Turbin) for the future? Would they get so worn out for 2015 if they handled backup carries in 2014.

Its seems the guy really beleives Lynch is their best RB and the team is better off with him on the field.

Well, duh.

That's in response to some one claiming that they are only playing Lynch "to run him into the ground so they can cut him". Yes it seems obvious to me as well that they think Lynch gives them the best chance to win, but that person seemed to think they,re using Lynch to save wear and tear on Michael.

Who claimed that?

The SEA RB coach

Lol. I was hoping he might get the takeaway from your post correct after rereading it. We'll see...

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Even if they planned on cutting him next year, why would they need to "run him into the ground" unless they really thought "there's a drop off"?

It seems that you are suggesting they have some devious plan, and aren't actually trying to win football games - Are they saving Michael (or Turbin) for the future? Would they get so worn out for 2015 if they handled backup carries in 2014.

Its seems the guy really beleives Lynch is their best RB and the team is better off with him on the field.

Well, duh.

That's in response to some one claiming that they are only playing Lynch "to run him into the ground so they can cut him". Yes it seems obvious to me as well that they think Lynch gives them the best chance to win, but that person seemed to think they,re using Lynch to save wear and tear on Michael.

I think I am getting mis-characterized here. I was just throwing out a hypothetical on the other extreme to show why they would never say things approaching that side. I think post #1575 lays out my thoughts pretty well, which specifically says I don't believe what you are claiming I think.

Well you took the time to create a ridiculous extreme counter scenario to what the RB coach actually said for some reason. Normally when some one would do that the implication is the RB coach would not come out and say that (despite it being true) - but I admit I should not have attributed that as your "thoughts" on the matter.

 

[ebsteelers]

so at texas a&m he never broke a 1000 yards in a season or a 170 carries in a year.

15 catches the most he had in a year..... and the hype train is still running down the 40, the 30, the 20, the 10......

He did way more than Frank Gore did in college.

181 more carries

816 more rushing yards

17 more rushing touchdowns

21 more receptions

Wat?

Michael played an extra season over Gore. And one of those seasons of Gores was cut to 5 games; blown out knee in spring.

The year after knee surgery he ran for more yards then Michael ever did in a season.

He also had Clinton Portis and Willis McGahee on his team.

Gore averaged a half more yard per carry over his career.

Pump up Michael all you want, but pulling back the curtain that's a bad statistical comparison to use.

Steeler's run in hyena packs. They are mangy dirty creatures looking to jump on a target in groups. Sad.

all that was posted was stats/facts that can be easily looked up.

I like Michael I have him on my team, I dont remember Gores hype train being anything like Michaels'.

 

[buck naked]

One great thing about this thread is that when even the slightest bit of news comes out about Lynch or Michael we get another 2-3 pages of strong opinions. All is takes is one revolution of the wheel downhill and here we go again.

This player thread is the perfect storm of player measureables v. player opportunity, when honestly nobody has any idea how this will turn out.

 

[Touchdown There]

so at texas a&m he never broke a 1000 yards in a season or a 170 carries in a year.

15 catches the most he had in a year..... and the hype train is still running down the 40, the 30, the 20, the 10......

He did way more than Frank Gore did in college.

181 more carries

816 more rushing yards

17 more rushing touchdowns

21 more receptions

Wat?

Michael played an extra season over Gore. And one of those seasons of Gores was cut to 5 games; blown out knee in spring.

The year after knee surgery he ran for more yards then Michael ever did in a season.

He also had Clinton Portis and Willis McGahee on his team.

Gore averaged a half more yard per carry over his career.

Pump up Michael all you want, but pulling back the curtain that's a bad statistical comparison to use.

Steeler's run in hyena packs. They are mangy dirty creatures looking to jump on a target in groups. Sad.

all that was posted was stats/facts that can be easily looked up.

I like Michael I have him on my team, I dont remember Gores hype train being anything like Michaels'.

The point here is that this board is overloaded with Steelers who hyena pack unsuspecting victims. Michael's ability is a different topic.

 

[Touchdown There]

One great thing about this thread is that when even the slightest bit of news comes out about Lynch or Michael we get another 2-3 pages of strong opinions. All is takes is one revolution of the wheel downhill and here we go again.

This player thread is the perfect storm of player measureables v. player opportunity, when honestly nobody has any idea how this will turn out.

Very true. The most likely scenario is that Lynch just takes all the reps this year. However, crazy stuff can happen.

 

[Neofight]

Even if they planned on cutting him next year, why would they need to "run him into the ground" unless they really thought "there's a drop off"?

It seems that you are suggesting they have some devious plan, and aren't actually trying to win football games - Are they saving Michael (or Turbin) for the future? Would they get so worn out for 2015 if they handled backup carries in 2014.

Its seems the guy really beleives Lynch is their best RB and the team is better off with him on the field.

Well, duh.

That's in response to some one claiming that they are only playing Lynch "to run him into the ground so they can cut him". Yes it seems obvious to me as well that they think Lynch gives them the best chance to win, but that person seemed to think they,re using Lynch to save wear and tear on Michael.

I think I am getting mis-characterized here. I was just throwing out a hypothetical on the other extreme to show why they would never say things approaching that side. I think post #1575 lays out my thoughts pretty well, which specifically says I don't believe what you are claiming I think.

Well you took the time to create a ridiculous extreme counter scenario to what the RB coach actually said for some reason. Normally when some one would do that the implication is the RB coach would not come out and say that (despite it being true) - but I admit I should not have attributed that as your "thoughts" on the matter.

His response was really about you taking the time to post the quote and thereby imply it meant much of anything. Good on you for admitting your false attribution.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Even if they planned on cutting him next year, why would they need to "run him into the ground" unless they really thought "there's a drop off"?

It seems that you are suggesting they have some devious plan, and aren't actually trying to win football games - Are they saving Michael (or Turbin) for the future? Would they get so worn out for 2015 if they handled backup carries in 2014.

Its seems the guy really beleives Lynch is their best RB and the team is better off with him on the field.

Well, duh.

That's in response to some one claiming that they are only playing Lynch "to run him into the ground so they can cut him". Yes it seems obvious to me as well that they think Lynch gives them the best chance to win, but that person seemed to think they,re using Lynch to save wear and tear on Michael.

I think I am getting mis-characterized here. I was just throwing out a hypothetical on the other extreme to show why they would never say things approaching that side. I think post #1575 lays out my thoughts pretty well, which specifically says I don't believe what you are claiming I think.

Well you took the time to create a ridiculous extreme counter scenario to what the RB coach actually said for some reason. Normally when some one would do that the implication is the RB coach would not come out and say that (despite it being true) - but I admit I should not have attributed that as your "thoughts" on the matter.

His response was really about you taking the time to post the quote and thereby imply it meant much of anything. Good on you for admitting your false attribution.

Sorry. Thought I was posting a statement that was posted as news at Rotoworld. I also thought people could take away whatever they wanted from it. Michael owners are in it for the long haul of course, but maybe they would appreciate some insight as to his immediate future.

I apologize to Joe as well for cluttering his board with quotes that mean nothing to Neofight.

 

[Neofight]

Joe's a pretty decent fella, I'm sure he's fine with it.

 

[cdubz]

Sorry. Thought I was posting a statement that was posted as news at Rotoworld. I also thought people could take away whatever they wanted from it. Michael owners are in it for the long haul of course, but maybe they would appreciate some insight as to his immediate future.

I apologize to Joe as well for cluttering his board with quotes that mean nothing to Neofight.

The hypothetical quote wasn't in response directly to the original quote, but rather buck naked's assertion that the quote was "Yet another indication of the gross overvaluing of Michael going on in the dynasty world".

I think the majority of us agree that quotes of that nature mean very little in terms of predicting the future, but I personally have no issue with the posting of such quotes. Every little bit helps to paint the picture IMHO.

Michael is the ultimate rorschach test at this point, people see what they want to see in him.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

so at texas a&m he never broke a 1000 yards in a season or a 170 carries in a year.

15 catches the most he had in a year..... and the hype train is still running down the 40, the 30, the 20, the 10......

He did way more than Frank Gore did in college.

181 more carries

816 more rushing yards

17 more rushing touchdowns

21 more receptions

Wat?

Michael played an extra season over Gore. And one of those seasons of Gores was cut to 5 games; blown out knee in spring.

The year after knee surgery he ran for more yards then Michael ever did in a season.

He also had Clinton Portis and Willis McGahee on his team.

Gore averaged a half more yard per carry over his career.

Pump up Michael all you want, but pulling back the curtain that's a bad statistical comparison to use.

Steeler's run in hyena packs. They are mangy dirty creatures looking to jump on a target in groups. Sad.

all that was posted was stats/facts that can be easily looked up.

I like Michael I have him on my team, I dont remember Gores hype train being anything like Michaels'.

The point here is that this board is overloaded with Steelers who hyena pack unsuspecting victims. Michael's ability is a different topic.

My post had nothing to with eb, he didn't bring up Gore. Its unfortunate its even with in my quote block.

 

[ebsteelers]

so at texas a&m he never broke a 1000 yards in a season or a 170 carries in a year.

15 catches the most he had in a year..... and the hype train is still running down the 40, the 30, the 20, the 10......

He did way more than Frank Gore did in college.

181 more carries

816 more rushing yards

17 more rushing touchdowns

21 more receptions

Wat?

Michael played an extra season over Gore. And one of those seasons of Gores was cut to 5 games; blown out knee in spring.

The year after knee surgery he ran for more yards then Michael ever did in a season.

He also had Clinton Portis and Willis McGahee on his team.

Gore averaged a half more yard per carry over his career.

Pump up Michael all you want, but pulling back the curtain that's a bad statistical comparison to use.

Steeler's run in hyena packs. They are mangy dirty creatures looking to jump on a target in groups. Sad.

all that was posted was stats/facts that can be easily looked up.

I like Michael I have him on my team, I dont remember Gores hype train being anything like Michaels'.

The point here is that this board is overloaded with Steelers who hyena pack unsuspecting victims. Michael's ability is a different topic.

My post had nothing to with eb, he didn't bring up Gore. Its unfortunate its even with in my quote block.

this is a michael thread though, so to unneccessary throw your comment in there seems like its a problem for you especially when Big Steel and me werent "attacking" anyone

Anyway back to Michael

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

Christine Michael - RB - Seahawks

The Tacoma News Tribune suggests Christine Michael could be the Seahawks feature back as soon as 2015.

Seattle-based ESPN reporter John Clayton recently made a similar suggestion. Marshawn Lynch is 28 years old, has piled up 1,753 NFL carries and carries a $9 million cap hit in 2015. The Seahawks, who just paid Earl Thomas and Richard Sherman, will need more money when it comes time to pay Russell Wilson. Michael, a supremely gifted natural runner, carries a mere $920,300 cap hit in 2015. Robert Turbin is just a pass-protection specialist.

Related: Marshawn Lynch, Robert Turbin

Source: Tacoma News Tribune

 

[The Man With No Name]

Rotoworld:

Christine Michael - RB - Seahawks

The Tacoma News Tribune suggests Christine Michael could be the Seahawks feature back as soon as 2015.

Seattle-based ESPN reporter John Clayton recently made a similar suggestion. Marshawn Lynch is 28 years old, has piled up 1,753 NFL carries and carries a $9 million cap hit in 2015. The Seahawks, who just paid Earl Thomas and Richard Sherman, will need more money when it comes time to pay Russell Wilson. Michael, a supremely gifted natural runner, carries a mere $920,300 cap hit in 2015. Robert Turbin is just a pass-protection specialist.

Related: Marshawn Lynch, Robert Turbin

Source: Tacoma News Tribune

They can cut Lynch and save 7.5 million in cap space

 

[fridayfrenzy]

Rotoworld:

Christine Michael - RB - Seahawks

The Tacoma News Tribune suggests Christine Michael could be the Seahawks feature back as soon as 2015.

Seattle-based ESPN reporter John Clayton recently made a similar suggestion. Marshawn Lynch is 28 years old, has piled up 1,753 NFL carries and carries a $9 million cap hit in 2015. The Seahawks, who just paid Earl Thomas and Richard Sherman, will need more money when it comes time to pay Russell Wilson. Michael, a supremely gifted natural runner, carries a mere $920,300 cap hit in 2015. Robert Turbin is just a pass-protection specialist.

Related: Marshawn Lynch, Robert Turbin

Source: Tacoma News Tribune

They can cut Lynch and save 7.5 million in cap space

With the price of RBs these days, it is very realistic that Lynch re-structures to approximately what he would receive on the open market just to stay with Seattle.

 

[Neofight]

Rotoworld:

Christine Michael - RB - Seahawks

The Tacoma News Tribune suggests Christine Michael could be the Seahawks feature back as soon as 2015.

Seattle-based ESPN reporter John Clayton recently made a similar suggestion. Marshawn Lynch is 28 years old, has piled up 1,753 NFL carries and carries a $9 million cap hit in 2015. The Seahawks, who just paid Earl Thomas and Richard Sherman, will need more money when it comes time to pay Russell Wilson. Michael, a supremely gifted natural runner, carries a mere $920,300 cap hit in 2015. Robert Turbin is just a pass-protection specialist.

Related: Marshawn Lynch, Robert Turbin

Source: Tacoma News Tribune

They can cut Lynch and save 7.5 million in cap space

With the price of RBs these days, it is very realistic that Lynch re-structures to approximately what he would receive on the open market just to stay with Seattle.

Assuming he stays healthy this season and has a year on par with 2013 (or better, which he is still plenty capable of) I agree with this. There are few teams that value a RB like Marshawn Lynch as highly as Seattle, and most of them have young RB's on their rosters. One team I could see making a play for him next season is Jacksonville, depending on how Gerhart works out. Even that seems a stretch however. More likely Lynch has another productive season, re-signs with the Seahawks for less money and splits the load with Michael in 2015, then retires a Seahawk a year or two later. One thing to remember is that Lynch doesn't like being too far away from his hometown (and hates the colder climates in the Midwest and northeast), so I guess that means Oakland could be in play if he were to get cut after 2014. I seriously doubt Seattle lets him walk with the possibility of the 49ers snatching him up though. Time will tell...

 

[FF Ninja]

Lynch is younger than Gore and look how long SF kept Gore around despite his very cut friendly contract. Lynch could easily be around next year, be it on the same contract or a restructured contract.

 

[EBF]

Or he could easily go the way of Clinton Portis and break down in another year.

Lots of variables involved here. I don't know how much value there is speculating about the situation.

If Michael is a difference-maker kind of talent, he will get his chance eventually.

 

[az_prof]

Or he could easily go the way of Clinton Portis and break down in another year.

Lots of variables involved here. I don't know how much value there is speculating about the situation.

If Michael is a difference-maker kind of talent, he will get his chance eventually.

After looking at the production of players post age 30, I am of the opinion that GENERALLY more physical players hit the wall sooner than fast/agile/smaller runners. This makes me think that Lynch is more likely in the early age group.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Or he could easily go the way of Clinton Portis and break down in another year.

Lots of variables involved here. I don't know how much value there is speculating about the situation.

If Michael is a difference-maker kind of talent, he will get his chance eventually.

After looking at the production of players post age 30, I am of the opinion that GENERALLY more physical players hit the wall sooner than fast/agile/smaller runners. This makes me think that Lynch is more likely in the early age group.

Well that will be 2016 at 30. And 2017 at 31.

 

[cstu]

Lynch is younger than Gore and look how long SF kept Gore around despite his very cut friendly contract. Lynch could easily be around next year, be it on the same contract or a restructured contract.

One of the major things Lynch has going for him is his health. Michael has never proven he can stay healthy an entire season (never even reached 150 carries). If Lynch is healthy all season again then I'd be shocked if they don't keep him for another year.

 

[Tool]

Or he could easily go the way of Clinton Portis and break down in another year.

Lots of variables involved here. I don't know how much value there is speculating about the situation.

If Michael is a difference-maker kind of talent, he will get his chance eventually.

Sure as hell isn't going to stop people from doing it though...

 

[Sabertooth]

I was just offered Michael for my 1.8 for a chance to "lock up the Seattle backfield"

I'm good. If I ain't taking him in the 1st last year, not a chance I would this year.

This exactly. He's not better or worse than Franklin or Lattimore. A total unknown.

I'll give you Lattimore, but Franklin's not worth a damn at this point.

Why isn't Franklin worth a damn? He had one start. Went over 100 yards and looks fantastic.

 

[Milkman]

Lol there is some serious trolling going on in here.

 

[EBF]

Hey, something resembling actual news:

http://www.fieldgulls.com/nfl-offseason-2014/2014/5/27/5755728/percy-harvin-earl-thomas-punt-returner-competition-injury-updates

Carroll also mentioned:

-- Christine Michael is a million miles ahead of where he was last year in terms of understanding scheme, protection, routes, etc. The team expects a lot from him this year.

 

[Tool]

I was just offered Michael for my 1.8 for a chance to "lock up the Seattle backfield"

I'm good. If I ain't taking him in the 1st last year, not a chance I would this year.

This exactly. He's not better or worse than Franklin or Lattimore. A total unknown.

I'll give you Lattimore, but Franklin's not worth a damn at this point.

Why isn't Franklin worth a damn? He had one start. Went over 100 yards and looks fantastic.

He's a backup rb.

 

[Bronx Bomber]

My favorite target in every dynasty league this year

why? you are massively over paying right now, if you really want him wait until he does nothing, again, this year

Not if you expect him to get to Bell, Ball, Gio, Lacy type prices next summer. Yes you're paying a lot based on nothing but hype and talent eval, but it could be a steal if you get him now versus wanting to buy him if/when Lynch moves on.