Christine Michael (1 Viewer)

[Donnybrook]

Bum

Preserved for posterity

 

[msudaisy26]

Generally speaking, the owners who landed Michael in their rookie drafts were the ones who value talent a lot more than situation.

Assuming no extenuating league circumstances (no contract complications, benches deep enough to hold, etc.) why would that type of owner be expected to value him a great deal less simply because his situation has not improved when their perception of his talent likely remains unchanged?

No surprise at all that there would be a disconnect between how he's valued by those who drafted him, and by owners who were unwilling to take that initial leap because of his situation.

No, the disconnect is and has been for a while that this who drafted him refuse to acknowledge that maybe their view of his talent was overstated.

There is always that possibility, but the only real "arguments" supporting conclusion at this point are weak due to their indirect nature. The argument about Michael's talent won't be settled until he succeeds or fails on the field.

Every year he fails to beat out Turbin as the 2nd RB in Sea seems to be a growing problem.

It is not like this type of situation hasn't happen before. KC Chiefs had a similar running back pecking order until Priest got injured and Blaylock went to the Jets.

1 Priest Holmes ~ Lynch

2 Derrick Blaylock ~ Turbin

3 Larry Johnson ~ Michaels

That is extremely wishful thinking.

 

[msudaisy26]

With the news that Turbin is recovering from hip surgery I am really surprised this thread hasn't broken the internet.

Turbin is not the problem. Lynch is the obstacle. Until he's gone, this thread is ZZZzzzz.

Best case is two more years and by then they will draft the next cmike anyway

More like by then he will be a free agent and sign as a starter elsewhere.

He will sign that low-end starter, high-end back-up contract in March and his fans will come to tell us all what a great day it is. Some of us will happily sell him to the highest bidder. In May the same team will draft some other running back in the 2nd/3rd round. CM fans will tell us the rookie is too something..slow...small..etc. Come fall they will split carries no more than 55-45 either way and both will marginally startable or at best difficult to tell who is the guy for that week. CM fans will say the coaching staff is at fault as to why he is getting Just Another Guy treatment. The following off-season the same team will bring in a 3rd guy just to further muddle the picture. At that point, I will find this post and make some snaky one line comment and say nothing else on the subject.

signed

Cleo...I Mean Cool Nerd

So...he's going to Carolina then??

No, if he goes to Carolina he will get starters money. They pay all their running backs starter money even if they are the back up.

 

[Donnybrook]

Generally speaking, the owners who landed Michael in their rookie drafts were the ones who value talent a lot more than situation.

Assuming no extenuating league circumstances (no contract complications, benches deep enough to hold, etc.) why would that type of owner be expected to value him a great deal less simply because his situation has not improved when their perception of his talent likely remains unchanged?

No surprise at all that there would be a disconnect between how he's valued by those who drafted him, and by owners who were unwilling to take that initial leap because of his situation.

No, the disconnect is and has been for a while that this who drafted him refuse to acknowledge that maybe their view of his talent was overstated.

There is always that possibility, but the only real "arguments" supporting conclusion at this point are weak due to their indirect nature. The argument about Michael's talent won't be settled until he succeeds or fails on the field.

Every year he fails to beat out Turbin as the 2nd RB in Sea seems to be a growing problem.

It is not like this type of situation hasn't happen before. KC Chiefs had a similar running back pecking order until Priest got injured and Blaylock went to the Jets.

1 Priest Holmes ~ Lynch

2 Derrick Blaylock ~ Turbin

3 Larry Johnson ~ Michaels

That is extremely wishful thinking.

Yes it is. Not unlike expecting to a 1st round rookie for Duron Carter. LOL

 

[msudaisy26]

Generally speaking, the owners who landed Michael in their rookie drafts were the ones who value talent a lot more than situation.

Assuming no extenuating league circumstances (no contract complications, benches deep enough to hold, etc.) why would that type of owner be expected to value him a great deal less simply because his situation has not improved when their perception of his talent likely remains unchanged?

No surprise at all that there would be a disconnect between how he's valued by those who drafted him, and by owners who were unwilling to take that initial leap because of his situation.

No, the disconnect is and has been for a while that this who drafted him refuse to acknowledge that maybe their view of his talent was overstated.

There is always that possibility, but the only real "arguments" supporting conclusion at this point are weak due to their indirect nature. The argument about Michael's talent won't be settled until he succeeds or fails on the field.

Every year he fails to beat out Turbin as the 2nd RB in Sea seems to be a growing problem.

It is not like this type of situation hasn't happen before. KC Chiefs had a similar running back pecking order until Priest got injured and Blaylock went to the Jets.

1 Priest Holmes ~ Lynch

2 Derrick Blaylock ~ Turbin

3 Larry Johnson ~ Michaels

That is extremely wishful thinking.

Yes it is. Not unlike expecting to a 1st round rookie for Duron Carter. LOL

Where is this coming from?

 

[mbuehner]

Generally speaking, the owners who landed Michael in their rookie drafts were the ones who value talent a lot more than situation.

Assuming no extenuating league circumstances (no contract complications, benches deep enough to hold, etc.) why would that type of owner be expected to value him a great deal less simply because his situation has not improved when their perception of his talent likely remains unchanged?

No surprise at all that there would be a disconnect between how he's valued by those who drafted him, and by owners who were unwilling to take that initial leap because of his situation.

No, the disconnect is and has been for a while that this who drafted him refuse to acknowledge that maybe their view of his talent was overstated.

There is always that possibility, but the only real "arguments" supporting conclusion at this point are weak due to their indirect nature. The argument about Michael's talent won't be settled until he succeeds or fails on the field.

Every year he fails to beat out Turbin as the 2nd RB in Sea seems to be a growing problem.

It is not like this type of situation hasn't happen before. KC Chiefs had a similar running back pecking order until Priest got injured and Blaylock went to the Jets. 1 Priest Holmes ~ Lynch

2 Derrick Blaylock ~ Turbin

3 Larry Johnson ~ Michaels

That is extremely wishful thinking.

Yes it is. Not unlike expecting to a 1st round rookie for Duron Carter. LOL

Where is this coming from?

Running backs in rookie drafts are always wildly overvalued.

 

[Donnybrook]

Generally speaking, the owners who landed Michael in their rookie drafts were the ones who value talent a lot more than situation.

Assuming no extenuating league circumstances (no contract complications, benches deep enough to hold, etc.) why would that type of owner be expected to value him a great deal less simply because his situation has not improved when their perception of his talent likely remains unchanged?

No surprise at all that there would be a disconnect between how he's valued by those who drafted him, and by owners who were unwilling to take that initial leap because of his situation.

No, the disconnect is and has been for a while that this who drafted him refuse to acknowledge that maybe their view of his talent was overstated.

There is always that possibility, but the only real "arguments" supporting conclusion at this point are weak due to their indirect nature. The argument about Michael's talent won't be settled until he succeeds or fails on the field.

Every year he fails to beat out Turbin as the 2nd RB in Sea seems to be a growing problem.

It is not like this type of situation hasn't happen before. KC Chiefs had a similar running back pecking order until Priest got injured and Blaylock went to the Jets.

1 Priest Holmes ~ Lynch

2 Derrick Blaylock ~ Turbin

3 Larry Johnson ~ Michaels

That is extremely wishful thinking.

Yes it is. Not unlike expecting to a 1st round rookie for Duron Carter. LOL

Where is this coming from?

https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?/topic/720900-duron-carter-poised-to-sign-with-an-nfl-team/page-7#entry17750942

 

[msudaisy26]

Generally speaking, the owners who landed Michael in their rookie drafts were the ones who value talent a lot more than situation.

Assuming no extenuating league circumstances (no contract complications, benches deep enough to hold, etc.) why would that type of owner be expected to value him a great deal less simply because his situation has not improved when their perception of his talent likely remains unchanged?

No surprise at all that there would be a disconnect between how he's valued by those who drafted him, and by owners who were unwilling to take that initial leap because of his situation.

No, the disconnect is and has been for a while that this who drafted him refuse to acknowledge that maybe their view of his talent was overstated.

There is always that possibility, but the only real "arguments" supporting conclusion at this point are weak due to their indirect nature. The argument about Michael's talent won't be settled until he succeeds or fails on the field.

Every year he fails to beat out Turbin as the 2nd RB in Sea seems to be a growing problem.

It is not like this type of situation hasn't happen before. KC Chiefs had a similar running back pecking order until Priest got injured and Blaylock went to the Jets. 1 Priest Holmes ~ Lynch

2 Derrick Blaylock ~ Turbin

3 Larry Johnson ~ Michaels

That is extremely wishful thinking.

Yes it is. Not unlike expecting to a 1st round rookie for Duron Carter. LOL

Where is this coming from?

https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?/topic/720900-duron-carter-poised-to-sign-with-an-nfl-team/page-7#entry17750942

Lol, try reading what I said again.

 

[Donnybrook]

Sounds to me that you wouldn't take a 2nd round pick for a player that is hardly roster-able in the deepest leagues. Do me a favor and don't rely to my posts and I won't reply to yours.

 

[msudaisy26]

Sounds to me that you wouldn't take a 2nd round pick for a player that is hardly roster-able in the deepest leagues. Do me a favor and don't rely to my posts and I won't reply to yours.

A little upset that you are wrong? I will reply to whatever posts I want to reply. I wouldn't take a 2nd at the time, but I didn't expect anyone to give me a first either and I admitted I hadn't done my homework on the incoming rookies yet either.

Since we are asking favors, do us all one and grow a spine before you post again, you are all upset because I said wishful thinking when comparing Michaels to Larry Johnson.

 

[Donnybrook]

God-forbid I compare Christine Michaels to Larry Johnson. Larry Johnson was a slightly above average running back that ran behind a great O-line. Moreover, he was a train wreck as a human being.

 

[Sabertooth]

Bum

Preserved for posterity

Not worried. What is your opinion of him?

 

[msudaisy26]

Bum

Preserved for posterity

Not worried. What is your opinion of him?

Larry Johnson 2.0

 

[Sabertooth]

So he's predicting 1700 yards this season? Because that's what Larry did in his third year.

 

[Donnybrook]

Bum

Preserved for posterity

Not worried. What is your opinion of him?

I think he still has a chance to a very productive running back. People over-react to the lack of early production. I remember when DeAnglo Williams spent two unproductive years behind Deshaun Foster. Pat Kirwin basically said that the Panthers were not to wise to draft Williams because he had too many carries in college. I also thought he bounced too many runs outside and decided to trade him, the year before he broke out. I don't want to repeat that mistake.

 

[cr8f]

This dude needs to get traded to the Cowboys.

If that happens, it tells you a lot about what SEA really thinks of him. Dallas was a team that went into SEA and beat them last year. They aren't going to do Dallas any favors.

Not sure they make trades (or not) that way. Depends on what benefits them, but don't see it happening. I don't think they see Turbin replacing Lynch.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

God-forbid I compare Christine Michaels to Larry Johnson. Larry Johnson was a slightly above average running back that ran behind a great O-line. Moreover, he was a train wreck as a human being.

Larry Johnson was quite a bit better than "slightly above average." Sure, the line and system made both Holmes and Johnson FF superstars, but Larry Johnson was a legit Pro Bowl level talent in his own right. The main component of his FF value was his ability to handle an absolutely freakish amount of touches for a while -- and that makes him an extremely weak comp for Michael, who never stayed healthy enough to carry a full load even in college.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

This dude needs to get traded to the Cowboys.

If that happens, it tells you a lot about what SEA really thinks of him. Dallas was a team that went into SEA and beat them last year. They aren't going to do Dallas any favors.

Not sure they make trades (or not) that way. Depends on what benefits them, but don't see it happening. I don't think they see Turbin replacing Lynch.

Given the fact that they've extended Lynch twice recently, I'd guess that they don't see anyone replacing him. And given how good he is, they're probably right.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

God-forbid I compare Christine Michaels to Larry Johnson. Larry Johnson was a slightly above average running back that ran behind a great O-line. Moreover, he was a train wreck as a human being.

Larry Johnson was quite a bit better than "slightly above average." Sure, the line and system made both Holmes and Johnson FF superstars, but Larry Johnson was a legit Pro Bowl level talent in his own right. The main component of his FF value was his ability to handle an absolutely freakish amount of touches for a while -- and that makes him an extremely weak comp for Michael, who never stayed healthy enough to carry a full load even in college.

Guys with low volume in college are typically bad players. But good players with low volume in college are still good players and there's nothing especially predictive about their NCAA volume in terms of the NFL workload they can handle.

At least that's what Priest Holmes, Frank Gore and (maybe) CJ Anderson told me.

 

[humpback]

Bum

Preserved for posterity

Not worried. What is your opinion of him?

I think he still has a chance to a very productive running back. People over-react to the lack of early production. I remember when DeAnglo Williams spent two unproductive years behind Deshaun Foster. Pat Kirwin basically said that the Panthers were not to wise to draft Williams because he had too many carries in college. I also thought he bounced too many runs outside and decided to trade him, the year before he broke out. I don't want to repeat that mistake.

Williams had more receiving yards in his rookie season than Michael has had total yards in his first two years combined. There is also the difference in college production, draft pedigree, etc.

I think it's too early to slam the door on Michael as well, but I don't think Williams is a good comp at all.

 

[Tool]

This dude needs to get traded to the Cowboys.

If that happens, it tells you a lot about what SEA really thinks of him. Dallas was a team that went into SEA and beat them last year. They aren't going to do Dallas any favors.

Not sure they make trades (or not) that way. Depends on what benefits them, but don't see it happening. I don't think they see Turbin replacing Lynch.

Given the fact that they've extended Lynch twice recently, I'd guess that they don't see anyone replacing him. And given how good he is, they're probably right.

well, someone's got to replace him eventually.

 

[Dragon1952]

This dude needs to get traded to the Cowboys.

If that happens, it tells you a lot about what SEA really thinks of him. Dallas was a team that went into SEA and beat them last year. They aren't going to do Dallas any favors.

Not sure they make trades (or not) that way. Depends on what benefits them, but don't see it happening. I don't think they see Turbin replacing Lynch.

Given the fact that they've extended Lynch twice recently, I'd guess that they don't see anyone replacing him. And given how good he is, they're probably right.

well, someone's got to replace him eventually.

Kinda like Antonio Gates and Ladarius Green?

 

[Zyphros]

Every time I see a new post in this thread, I come in hoping it's some useful piece of info. Then I read it and it's the same psycho-babble BS that's been going on for 60+ pages. Can we leave it alone for a bit til there is actually some news?

Lynch goes down b/c a defender hits him so hard he tears his leg off - NOW talk about Cmike

 

[cstu]

If he's healthy, Lynch will be back next year as well. He's due $9M in salary (non-guaranteed) but he'll have $5M in dead money if they cut him. $9M isn't pocket change but he's the identity of the team and most importantly he can be trusted.

 

[Tool]

Every time I see a new post in this thread, I come in hoping it's some useful piece of info. Then I read it and it's the same psycho-babble BS that's been going on for 60+ pages. Can we leave it alone for a bit til there is actually some news?

Lynch goes down b/c a defender hits him so hard he tears his leg off - NOW talk about Cmike

You know it's the middle of May, right?

 

[Coeur de Lion]

This dude needs to get traded to the Cowboys.

If that happens, it tells you a lot about what SEA really thinks of him. Dallas was a team that went into SEA and beat them last year. They aren't going to do Dallas any favors.

Not sure they make trades (or not) that way. Depends on what benefits them, but don't see it happening. I don't think they see Turbin replacing Lynch.

Given the fact that they've extended Lynch twice recently, I'd guess that they don't see anyone replacing him. And given how good he is, they're probably right.

well, someone's got to replace him eventually.

Yeah, but not necessarily one guy, and not necessarily anyone on the current roster. We have no idea at this point.

 

[Sabertooth]

I've held onto Michael too long. I actually released CJ Anderson last season to keep Michael. If I can get a Buck Allen or Josh Robinson for him after the draft, I'd do it.

 

[VarsityBlues123]

I've held onto Michael too long. I actually released CJ Anderson last season to keep Michael. If I can get a Buck Allen or Josh Robinson for him after the draft, I'd do it.

Serious question, if you do things like that with your team why are you quick to tell others how to runs their on this site?

 

[Coeur de Lion]

I've held onto Michael too long. I actually released CJ Anderson last season to keep Michael. If I can get a Buck Allen or Josh Robinson for him after the draft, I'd do it.

Serious question, if you do things like that with your team why are you quick to tell others how to runs their on this site?

Evidently you've never made a bad call. Up until about midseason, Michael over Anderson was a call that most people would have made without having to think too hard about it. Sometimes guys come out of nowhere.

 

[Sabertooth]

I've held onto Michael too long. I actually released CJ Anderson last season to keep Michael. If I can get a Buck Allen or Josh Robinson for him after the draft, I'd do it.

Serious question, if you do things like that with your team why are you quick to tell others how to runs their on this site?

Serious question, who are you again?

 

[VarsityBlues123]

I've held onto Michael too long. I actually released CJ Anderson last season to keep Michael. If I can get a Buck Allen or Josh Robinson for him after the draft, I'd do it.

Serious question, if you do things like that with your team why are you quick to tell others how to runs their on this site?

Serious question, who are you again?

I'm a nobody like many but what does that have to do with cutting Michael for Anderson when the writing was on the wall that he was a non factor. The only thing we have to go off for evaluating the content we take is the credibility of the content providers. Should people trust what you say more or less when you admit something like that?

 

[Cjw_55106]

I've held onto Michael too long. I actually released CJ Anderson last season to keep Michael. If I can get a Buck Allen or Josh Robinson for him after the draft, I'd do it.

Serious question, if you do things like that with your team why are you quick to tell others how to runs their on this site?

Anderson was the third back on a pass first team. Cutting him would have been simple.

 

[VarsityBlues123]

I've held onto Michael too long. I actually released CJ Anderson last season to keep Michael. If I can get a Buck Allen or Josh Robinson for him after the draft, I'd do it.

Serious question, if you do things like that with your team why are you quick to tell others how to runs their on this site?

Anderson was the third back on a pass first team. Cutting him would have been simple.

Michael was a third back on a team with an already solidified #1 every down RB. Plus isnt the point to look ahead?

 

[mikmak8902]

I've held onto Michael too long. I actually released CJ Anderson last season to keep Michael. If I can get a Buck Allen or Josh Robinson for him after the draft, I'd do it.

Serious question, if you do things like that with your team why are you quick to tell others how to runs their on this site?

Anderson was the third back on a pass first team. Cutting him would have been simple.

Michael was a third back on a team with an already solidified #1 every down RB. Plus isnt the point to look ahead?

I have been holding onto Michael since I drafted him in our dynasty rookie draft and the reason I held on to him was my expectation that there was no way in hell Seattle would resign Lynch with two young backs waiting in the wings. It was the perfect scenario. Michael (in my plans) was supposed to easily beat out Robert Turbin this year for the starting gig.

Now that Lynch has re-signed with Seattle, I don't think I can continue to wait on Michael with the cap hit he's costing me. I'll be moving him to the Lynch owner and regretting my decision when Lynch finally goes down with a major injury or retires. But hey ... you can't wait forever on guys.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

I've held onto Michael too long. I actually released CJ Anderson last season to keep Michael. If I can get a Buck Allen or Josh Robinson for him after the draft, I'd do it.

Serious question, if you do things like that with your team why are you quick to tell others how to runs their on this site?

Anderson was the third back on a pass first team. Cutting him would have been simple.

Michael was a third back on a team with an already solidified #1 every down RB. Plus isnt the point to look ahead?

Excellent point. So looking ahead with your combo of crystal ball and fantasy knowledge, who do you see being the next CJ Anderson this year?

 

[Sabertooth]

I've held onto Michael too long. I actually released CJ Anderson last season to keep Michael. If I can get a Buck Allen or Josh Robinson for him after the draft, I'd do it.

Serious question, if you do things like that with your team why are you quick to tell others how to runs their on this site?

Anderson was the third back on a pass first team. Cutting him would have been simple.

Michael was a third back on a team with an already solidified #1 every down RB. Plus isnt the point to look ahead?

Excellent point. So looking ahead with your combo of crystal ball and fantasy knowledge, who do you see being the next CJ Anderson this year?

Yep, hindsight is 20/20. Easy to take pot shots.

 

[Shutout]

I've held onto Michael too long. I actually released CJ Anderson last season to keep Michael. If I can get a Buck Allen or Josh Robinson for him after the draft, I'd do it.

Serious question, if you do things like that with your team why are you quick to tell others how to runs their on this site?

Serious question, who are you again?

I'm a nobody like many but what does that have to do with cutting Michael for Anderson when the writing was on the wall that he was a non factor. The only thing we have to go off for evaluating the content we take is the credibility of the content providers. Should people trust what you say more or less when you admit something like that?

In Sabertooth's defense, I can remember that going into last season, there were about 5 of us in the world talking about Anderson (and actually rostering him). In the first couple months of the season, the number of people even having Anderson on a roster was still VERY low. So the fact he had the decision to make at all shows foresight.

 

[VarsityBlues123]

I've held onto Michael too long. I actually released CJ Anderson last season to keep Michael. If I can get a Buck Allen or Josh Robinson for him after the draft, I'd do it.

Serious question, if you do things like that with your team why are you quick to tell others how to runs their on this site?

Serious question, who are you again?

I'm a nobody like many but what does that have to do with cutting Michael for Anderson when the writing was on the wall that he was a non factor. The only thing we have to go off for evaluating the content we take is the credibility of the content providers. Should people trust what you say more or less when you admit something like that?

In Sabertooth's defense, I can remember that going into last season, there were about 5 of us in the world talking about Anderson (and actually rostering him). In the first couple months of the season, the number of people even having Anderson on a roster was still VERY low. So the fact he had the decision to make at all shows foresight.

People talking about someone on a message board equates to perceived value not actual value. That is the problem when people base their value of chatter.

 

[mikmak8902]

I've held onto Michael too long. I actually released CJ Anderson last season to keep Michael. If I can get a Buck Allen or Josh Robinson for him after the draft, I'd do it.

Serious question, if you do things like that with your team why are you quick to tell others how to runs their on this site?

Serious question, who are you again?

I'm a nobody like many but what does that have to do with cutting Michael for Anderson when the writing was on the wall that he was a non factor. The only thing we have to go off for evaluating the content we take is the credibility of the content providers. Should people trust what you say more or less when you admit something like that?

In Sabertooth's defense, I can remember that going into last season, there were about 5 of us in the world talking about Anderson (and actually rostering him). In the first couple months of the season, the number of people even having Anderson on a roster was still VERY low. So the fact he had the decision to make at all shows foresight.

bingo

 

[Chaka]

I've held onto Michael too long. I actually released CJ Anderson last season to keep Michael. If I can get a Buck Allen or Josh Robinson for him after the draft, I'd do it.

Serious question, if you do things like that with your team why are you quick to tell others how to runs their on this site?

Serious question, who are you again?

I'm a nobody like many but what does that have to do with cutting Michael for Anderson when the writing was on the wall that he was a non factor. The only thing we have to go off for evaluating the content we take is the credibility of the content providers. Should people trust what you say more or less when you admit something like that?

In Sabertooth's defense, I can remember that going into last season, there were about 5 of us in the world talking about Anderson (and actually rostering him). In the first couple months of the season, the number of people even having Anderson on a roster was still VERY low. So the fact he had the decision to make at all shows foresight.

People talking about someone on a message board equates to perceived value not actual value. That is the problem when people base their value of chatter.

Wat?

 

[Donnybrook]

Bum

Preserved for posterity

Not worried. What is your opinion of him?

I think he still has a chance to a very productive running back. People over-react to the lack of early production. I remember when DeAnglo Williams spent two unproductive years behind Deshaun Foster. Pat Kirwin basically said that the Panthers were not to wise to draft Williams because he had too many carries in college. I also thought he bounced too many runs outside and decided to trade him, the year before he broke out. I don't want to repeat that mistake.

Williams had more receiving yards in his rookie season than Michael has had total yards in his first two years combined. There is also the difference in college production, draft pedigree, etc.

I think it's too early to slam the door on Michael as well, but I don't think Williams is a good comp at all.

I am not talking about Williams being a comp. I am talking about perception. When Williams did not instantly pass injury ridden Deshaun Foster, people (like myself) started doubting his ability.

 

[Buffaloes]

I've held onto Michael too long. I actually released CJ Anderson last season to keep Michael. If I can get a Buck Allen or Josh Robinson for him after the draft, I'd do it.

Serious question, if you do things like that with your team why are you quick to tell others how to runs their on this site?

Anderson was the third back on a pass first team. Cutting him would have been simple.

Michael was a third back on a team with an already solidified #1 every down RB. Plus isnt the point to look ahead?

CJ Anderson was a healthy scratch behind the likes of Monte Ball, Ronnie Hillman and UDFA Juwan Thompson when Denver couldn't run the ball last season. The talent was there, but there was no indication that he would be given an opportunity to touch the ball let alone run away with the job.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I've held onto Michael too long. I actually released CJ Anderson last season to keep Michael. If I can get a Buck Allen or Josh Robinson for him after the draft, I'd do it.

Serious question, if you do things like that with your team why are you quick to tell others how to runs their on this site?

Anderson was the third back on a pass first team. Cutting him would have been simple.

Michael was a third back on a team with an already solidified #1 every down RB. Plus isnt the point to look ahead?

CJ Anderson was a healthy scratch behind the likes of Monte Ball, Ronnie Hillman and UDFA Juwan Thompson when Denver couldn't run the ball last season. The talent was there, but there was no indication that he would be given an opportunity to touch the ball let alone run away with the job.

Odd.

I went into my main draft last year (Aug 31) and he was the reason I didn't want to touch the other Denver backs.

I had CJ as the best #2 to own (for long term prospects) behind Carlos Hyde. *Tthough some already in a rbbc may have rated higher.

 

[Buffaloes]

I've held onto Michael too long. I actually released CJ Anderson last season to keep Michael. If I can get a Buck Allen or Josh Robinson for him after the draft, I'd do it.

Serious question, if you do things like that with your team why are you quick to tell others how to runs their on this site?

Anderson was the third back on a pass first team. Cutting him would have been simple.

Michael was a third back on a team with an already solidified #1 every down RB. Plus isnt the point to look ahead?

CJ Anderson was a healthy scratch behind the likes of Monte Ball, Ronnie Hillman and UDFA Juwan Thompson when Denver couldn't run the ball last season. The talent was there, but there was no indication that he would be given an opportunity to touch the ball let alone run away with the job.

Odd.

I went into my main draft last year (Aug 31) and he was the reason I didn't want to touch the other Denver backs.

I had CJ as the best #2 to own (for long term prospects) behind Carlos Hyde. *Tthough some already in a rbbc may have rated higher.

a lot of ppl were high on Anderson going into last season, but once he was buried on the depth chart behind Ball, Hillman and a rookie UDFA it's kind of easy to see why during the season amidst a roster crunch someone would value Michael over Anderson at that point in time.

 

[Donnybrook]

Jeff Legwold was the source that was raining on the CJ Anderson parade last year. He came in over-weight and he was speculating that he could be cut in favor of Juwan Thompson and Brennan Clay

 

[Shutout]

I've held onto Michael too long. I actually released CJ Anderson last season to keep Michael. If I can get a Buck Allen or Josh Robinson for him after the draft, I'd do it.

Serious question, if you do things like that with your team why are you quick to tell others how to runs their on this site?

Anderson was the third back on a pass first team. Cutting him would have been simple.

Michael was a third back on a team with an already solidified #1 every down RB. Plus isnt the point to look ahead?

CJ Anderson was a healthy scratch behind the likes of Monte Ball, Ronnie Hillman and UDFA Juwan Thompson when Denver couldn't run the ball last season. The talent was there, but there was no indication that he would be given an opportunity to touch the ball let alone run away with the job.

That's not really true. Cj Anderson had been injured the year before and because of that, combined with his lack of draft status, many people wrongly glossed over him. During the offseason prior to the beginning of last year, there were some of us in the forums telling people to look at the year prior and learn the lesson because the same thing happened to Moreno. The year before, there were reports that Moreno might not even make the team but there were some of saying "he was injured and this is how Fox does it and he can pass block. Moreno will be the guy". That went ignored largely but came to be.

Then with Anderson, it was the same thing all over again. We were pounding the table saying "Anderson is the one guy on the team that has the best blend AND keep in mind, the team didn't try to sneak him through to the team by waiving him, they cut a guy and kept him on the team despite having lots of injuries to deal with at the time. That shows they like this guy. And then it came to be.

So the misconception that this guy couldn't get higher than 3 on the chart or was a healthy scratch was never the case with Moreno or Anderson. It was Fox doing something smart that he rarely gets recognized for.

 

[Buffaloes]

So the misconception that this guy couldn't get higher than 3 on the chart or was a healthy scratch was never the case with Moreno or Anderson. It was Fox doing something smart that he rarely gets recognized for.

it wasn't a misconception and the CJ Anderson is apples to oranges when compared to Moreno's situation the year prior. I had Anderson and Moreno going into those seasons and the situations were nowhere near alike.

As for CJ Anderson, he was a healthy scratch early in the regular season last year sitting behind Ball, Hillman and Thompson. Anderson ascending to the top of the depth chart had nothing to do with Fox doing something smart and everything to do with Anderson seizing an unplanned opportunity due to Ball and Hillman being nicked up and Fox not wanting to hand over the lions-share of carries to rookie UDFA Thompson who was previously above Anderson on the regular-season depth chart. I know because I am a homer and watched closely as CJ was behind far lesser talents week after week during the regular season. There was no indication from the staff that CJ was going to get an opp until Ball was already out and Hillman injured his foot. Then CJ took a dump pass from Manning in a game Denver was struggling against the Raiders, went all CJ Anderson and then the tide turned. Until that point Anderson was viewed as a high-upside RB with a lot of untapped talent buried on the depth chart in a bad rush offense. Likewise, Michael was viewed as a high-upside RB with a lot of untapped talent behind a guy who may be on his last legs in a very good rush offense.

I agree a lot of ppl saw the talent in CJ. A lot of ppl saw/see it in Michael as well. If a team had dropped Anderson and kept Michael when Anderson wasn't suiting up against AZ or SD last year (despite being healthy) I don't think a lot of pple would have viewed it as a stretch at this time. To say it was such an obvious move now and that the writing was on the wall before Hillman was injured is pure hindsight.

 

[bumpman]

And this time next year CJ could be the next Tre Mason.

 

[cstu]

I'm an Lynch/Turbin owner and offered Cardinals RB David Johnson (who I think could start this year) for Michael...was rejected. Probably will be glad but it's not a good feeling being a Lynch owner without him.

 

[Shutout]

So the misconception that this guy couldn't get higher than 3 on the chart or was a healthy scratch was never the case with Moreno or Anderson. It was Fox doing something smart that he rarely gets recognized for.

it wasn't a misconception and the CJ Anderson is apples to oranges when compared to Moreno's situation the year prior. I had Anderson and Moreno going into those seasons and the situations were nowhere near alike.

As for CJ Anderson, he was a healthy scratch early in the regular season last year sitting behind Ball, Hillman and Thompson. Anderson ascending to the top of the depth chart had nothing to do with Fox doing something smart and everything to do with Anderson seizing an unplanned opportunity due to Ball and Hillman being nicked up and Fox not wanting to hand over the lions-share of carries to rookie UDFA Thompson who was previously above Anderson on the regular-season depth chart. I know because I am a homer and watched closely as CJ was behind far lesser talents week after week during the regular season. There was no indication from the staff that CJ was going to get an opp until Ball was already out and Hillman injured his foot. Then CJ took a dump pass from Manning in a game Denver was struggling against the Raiders, went all CJ Anderson and then the tide turned. Until that point Anderson was viewed as a high-upside RB with a lot of untapped talent buried on the depth chart in a bad rush offense. Likewise, Michael was viewed as a high-upside RB with a lot of untapped talent behind a guy who may be on his last legs in a very good rush offense.

I agree a lot of ppl saw the talent in CJ. A lot of ppl saw/see it in Michael as well. If a team had dropped Anderson and kept Michael when Anderson wasn't suiting up against AZ or SD last year (despite being healthy) I don't think a lot of pple would have viewed it as a stretch at this time. To say it was such an obvious move now and that the writing was on the wall before Hillman was injured is pure hindsight.

Go back and refresh your memory. You will find statement after statement of the Denver coaches saying he wasn't completely healthy and they weren't rushing him back. It's irrelevant in how any of us want to write 5 paragraphs justifying it. The bottom line is there were those of us who saw what was going on and those of us who didn't and it's evident by those who had Moreno on their roster when everyone had him written off, had Anderson on their roster when no one knew who he was, and those who burned high picks on Ball and then handcuffed him with Hillman.

Nothing we say now is going allow people to go back and better their past teams. I was just saying that people are really remembering this in very different ways.