Christine Michael (1 Viewer)

[biju]

Terry Blount has gone back to cars. Thank goodness.

http://www.nhra.com/story/2015/7/9/terry-blount/

Good riddance.

--Signed, all of Seattle

 

[KellysHeroes]

Christine Michael may be on the bubble in training camp:

http://espn.go.com/blog/seattle-seahawks/post/_/id/13425/christine-michael-may-be-on-the-bubble-in-training-camp

LOL, but his metrics and measurables are so good!!!

I remember when people were pimping him for a late 1st

 

[fridayfrenzy]

http://www.hawkblogger.com/2015/07/slow-your-roll-espn.html

"Two fullbacks make the roster

Yep. You read that right. Blount has both Derrick Coleman and Will Tukuafu "likely" making the roster. Cutting Michael in order to have two players a position that only plays ~20% of the offensive snaps would be beyond absurd. Hard to have any credibility after coming to that conclusion."

 

[Warpig]

http://www.hawkblogger.com/2015/07/slow-your-roll-espn.html

"Two fullbacks make the roster

Yep. You read that right. Blount has both Derrick Coleman and Will Tukuafu "likely" making the roster. Cutting Michael in order to have two players a position that only plays ~20% of the offensive snaps would be beyond absurd. Hard to have any credibility after coming to that conclusion."

Not to be a smart ###, but 20% of the time is still more time than Michael gets isn't it? I cut bait with Michael earlier this year.

 

[humpback]

http://www.hawkblogger.com/2015/07/slow-your-roll-espn.html

"Two fullbacks make the roster

Yep. You read that right. Blount has both Derrick Coleman and Will Tukuafu "likely" making the roster. Cutting Michael in order to have two players a position that only plays ~20% of the offensive snaps would be beyond absurd. Hard to have any credibility after coming to that conclusion."

I doubt he gets cut (although it's possible), but both of those guys were on the roster last year, and they both played a lot more than Michael.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

http://www.hawkblogger.com/2015/07/slow-your-roll-espn.html

"Two fullbacks make the roster

Yep. You read that right. Blount has both Derrick Coleman and Will Tukuafu "likely" making the roster. Cutting Michael in order to have two players a position that only plays ~20% of the offensive snaps would be beyond absurd. Hard to have any credibility after coming to that conclusion."

I doubt he gets cut (although it's possible), but both of those guys were on the roster last year, and they both played a lot more than Michael.

Coleman got injured and put on IR and was replaced with Tukuafu. They weren't dressed at the same time.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

http://www.hawkblogger.com/2015/07/slow-your-roll-espn.html

"Two fullbacks make the roster

Yep. You read that right. Blount has both Derrick Coleman and Will Tukuafu "likely" making the roster. Cutting Michael in order to have two players a position that only plays ~20% of the offensive snaps would be beyond absurd. Hard to have any credibility after coming to that conclusion."

Not to be a smart ###, but 20% of the time is still more time than Michael gets isn't it? I cut bait with Michael earlier this year.

The reference was to how many snaps the fullback position played. Michael's position is on the field a lot more than 20%.

 

[Sabertooth]

http://www.hawkblogger.com/2015/07/slow-your-roll-espn.html

"Two fullbacks make the roster

Yep. You read that right. Blount has both Derrick Coleman and Will Tukuafu "likely" making the roster. Cutting Michael in order to have two players a position that only plays ~20% of the offensive snaps would be beyond absurd. Hard to have any credibility after coming to that conclusion."

Not to be a smart ###, but 20% of the time is still more time than Michael gets isn't it? I cut bait with Michael earlier this year.

The reference was to how many snaps the fullback position played. Michael's position is on the field a lot more than 20%.

Michael's position is "sitting down."

 

[humpback]

http://www.hawkblogger.com/2015/07/slow-your-roll-espn.html

"Two fullbacks make the roster

Yep. You read that right. Blount has both Derrick Coleman and Will Tukuafu "likely" making the roster. Cutting Michael in order to have two players a position that only plays ~20% of the offensive snaps would be beyond absurd. Hard to have any credibility after coming to that conclusion."

I doubt he gets cut (although it's possible), but both of those guys were on the roster last year, and they both played a lot more than Michael.

Coleman got injured and put on IR and was replaced with Tukuafu. They weren't dressed at the same time.

And?

 

[fridayfrenzy]

http://www.hawkblogger.com/2015/07/slow-your-roll-espn.html

"Two fullbacks make the roster

Yep. You read that right. Blount has both Derrick Coleman and Will Tukuafu "likely" making the roster. Cutting Michael in order to have two players a position that only plays ~20% of the offensive snaps would be beyond absurd. Hard to have any credibility after coming to that conclusion."

I doubt he gets cut (although it's possible), but both of those guys were on the roster last year, and they both played a lot more than Michael.

Coleman got injured and put on IR and was replaced with Tukuafu. They weren't dressed at the same time.

And?

So they only used one roster spot combined last year and the article states they will use two spots on FB at the expense of cutting Michael. It is hard to believe.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

http://www.hawkblogger.com/2015/07/slow-your-roll-espn.html

"Two fullbacks make the roster

Yep. You read that right. Blount has both Derrick Coleman and Will Tukuafu "likely" making the roster. Cutting Michael in order to have two players a position that only plays ~20% of the offensive snaps would be beyond absurd. Hard to have any credibility after coming to that conclusion."

I doubt he gets cut (although it's possible), but both of those guys were on the roster last year, and they both played a lot more than Michael.

Coleman got injured and put on IR and was replaced with Tukuafu. They weren't dressed at the same time.

And?

So they only used one roster spot combined last year and the article states they will use two spots on FB at the expense of cutting Michael. It is hard to believe.

Do either of them contribute on special teams?

 

[humpback]

http://www.hawkblogger.com/2015/07/slow-your-roll-espn.html

"Two fullbacks make the roster

Yep. You read that right. Blount has both Derrick Coleman and Will Tukuafu "likely" making the roster. Cutting Michael in order to have two players a position that only plays ~20% of the offensive snaps would be beyond absurd. Hard to have any credibility after coming to that conclusion."

I doubt he gets cut (although it's possible), but both of those guys were on the roster last year, and they both played a lot more than Michael.

Coleman got injured and put on IR and was replaced with Tukuafu. They weren't dressed at the same time.

And?

So they only used one roster spot combined last year and the article states they will use two spots on FB at the expense of cutting Michael. It is hard to believe.

Michael wasn't active either until Coleman got injured and they were forced to use Turbin at FB. After that experiment ended and they signed Tukuafu, Lynch got back on track. They also had both Coleman and Robinson active for several weeks in 2013, so it isn't unprecedented for them to keep 2 FBs on the roster.

Again, still don't think it's likely, but it's isn't that crazy to think they they'd keep Tukuafu over Michael. FB is an important position for Seattle, and he is more versatile- he plays special teams and backs up on the D-line.

 

[Donnybrook]

Will Tukuafu is a 31 year old undrafted free agent who has been bouncing around the league for several years. The Seahawks have him on a 1 year vet minimum contract with 80 grand guaranteed. You have to question if anyone would pick him up if he were to be released.

Michael has 2 years remaining on his rookie deal and the Seahawks would have a cap hit of 400 grand. The likely-hood that Michael would be picked up is high. It shouldn't be a difficult decision for the Hawks.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Will Tukuafu is a 31 year old undrafted free agent who has been bouncing around the league for several years. The Seahawks have him on a 1 year vet minimum contract with 80 grand guaranteed. You have to question if anyone would pick him up if he were to be released.

Michael has 2 years remaining on his rookie deal and the Seahawks would have a cap hit of 400 grand. The likely-hood that Michael would be picked up is high. It shouldn't be a difficult decision for the Hawks.

Agreed.

I don't really believe that the team will cut Michael. Seems highly unlikely, no matter how underwhelmed they just might be with him.

And I was the first guy in the thread who was talking about how the team wasn't happy with how he was coming along.

 

[Streetduck]

Personally I don't care, there are plenty of teams that will bring him in for a look. I would welcome a shot with another team then I could finally make a decision on him based on what he does. It is entirely impossible to do so and will be for all the guys in love with Rawls as long as Beast Mode is around.

 

[Bruce Hammond]

Rule of Thumb #24,802:

Never trust a player with two first names.

Rule of Thumb #24,803:

Especially when one of those names is a girl name.

Rule of Thumb #24,804:

Rules of thumb are often totally useless.

 

[cr8f]

Still have him on my DTS in a dynasty, let Turbin go in free agency, so don't have much backing up Lynch, have Randle but wouldn't mind seeing Dallas get him.

Just waiting to see how the cards fall, too early to make any conclusions or guesses. 2 weeks to TC.

 

[Riffraff]

Would love to see the reaction if he gets waived only to get picked up to back-up/play 3rd string behind Bell, Hill, or Lacy.

 

[Freelove]

Can't imagine any team with a franchise, nine-figure type QB picking up a one dimensional backup RB who can't learn how to block.

 

[cr8f]

I don't see him getting cut, a trade far more likely even if it's conditional. His low value now just as extreme as his high value a year or 2 ago.

 

[jurb26]

I don't see him getting cut, a trade far more likely even if it's conditional. His low value now just as extreme as his high value a year or 2 ago.

Getting cut is far more likely than getting traded. How many times to you see a 3rd string RB get traded? Teams will just wait until he's cut.

 

[cacksman]

I don't see him getting cut, a trade far more likely even if it's conditional. His low value now just as extreme as his high value a year or 2 ago.

Getting cut is far more likely than getting traded. How many times to you see a 3rd string RB get traded? Teams will just wait until he's cut.

Neither is happening, but what you said is incorrect. Teams trade late round picks for players every August.

 

[jurb26]

I don't see him getting cut, a trade far more likely even if it's conditional. His low value now just as extreme as his high value a year or 2 ago.

Getting cut is far more likely than getting traded. How many times to you see a 3rd string RB get traded? Teams will just wait until he's cut.

Neither is happening, but what you said is incorrect. Teams trade late round picks for players every August.

They cut far more than they trade.

 

[cr8f]

I don't see him getting cut, a trade far more likely even if it's conditional. His low value now just as extreme as his high value a year or 2 ago.

Getting cut is far more likely than getting traded. How many times to you see a 3rd string RB get traded? Teams will just wait until he's cut.

Neither is happening, but what you said is incorrect. Teams trade late round picks for players every August.

They cut far more than they trade.

That was true when they were building this team and brought in a ton of players. They do it far less now.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

I don't see him getting cut, a trade far more likely even if it's conditional. His low value now just as extreme as his high value a year or 2 ago.

Getting cut is far more likely than getting traded. How many times to you see a 3rd string RB get traded? Teams will just wait until he's cut.

If Zac Stacy has enough value to be traded, then so would Christine Michael.

You honestly don't think a team would pay a conditional 7th round pick for a player like Christine Michael? If the Seahawks were honestly going to cut him, they would take anything for him.

 

[The Man With No Name]

I don't see him getting cut, a trade far more likely even if it's conditional. His low value now just as extreme as his high value a year or 2 ago.

Getting cut is far more likely than getting traded. How many times to you see a 3rd string RB get traded? Teams will just wait until he's cut.

If Zac Stacy has enough value to be traded, then so would Christine Michael.

You honestly don't think a team would pay a conditional 7th round pick for a player like Christine Michael? If the Seahawks were honestly going to cut him, they would take anything for him.

Right.

He won't be a free agent. So if a team wants him, they will give a pick for him. Can't count on all the teams ahead of your waiver spot passing on him.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I don't see him getting cut, a trade far more likely even if it's conditional. His low value now just as extreme as his high value a year or 2 ago.

Getting cut is far more likely than getting traded. How many times to you see a 3rd string RB get traded? Teams will just wait until he's cut.

If Zac Stacy has enough value to be traded, then so would Christine Michael.

You honestly don't think a team would pay a conditional 7th round pick for a player like Christine Michael? If the Seahawks were honestly going to cut him, they would take anything for him.

Zac showed pretty well in extended use for an offensively defunct team.

While his quality isnt exceptional, it is a known and useable quality.

 

[jurb26]

I don't see him getting cut, a trade far more likely even if it's conditional. His low value now just as extreme as his high value a year or 2 ago.

Getting cut is far more likely than getting traded. How many times to you see a 3rd string RB get traded? Teams will just wait until he's cut.

If Zac Stacy has enough value to be traded, then so would Christine Michael.

You honestly don't think a team would pay a conditional 7th round pick for a player like Christine Michael? If the Seahawks were honestly going to cut him, they would take anything for him.

Zac showed pretty well in extended use for an offensively defunct team.

While his quality isnt exceptional, it is a known and useable quality.

That and it always seems great in theory to trade guys for something rather than just cut them and get nothing. Yet, it continually happens in the NFL. I find it surprising year after year. Nonetheless it happens. Players far better than CM have been cut.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

I don't see him getting cut, a trade far more likely even if it's conditional. His low value now just as extreme as his high value a year or 2 ago.

Getting cut is far more likely than getting traded. How many times to you see a 3rd string RB get traded? Teams will just wait until he's cut.

If Zac Stacy has enough value to be traded, then so would Christine Michael.

You honestly don't think a team would pay a conditional 7th round pick for a player like Christine Michael? If the Seahawks were honestly going to cut him, they would take anything for him.

Zac showed pretty well in extended use for an offensively defunct team.

While his quality isnt exceptional, it is a known and useable quality.

That and it always seems great in theory to trade guys for something rather than just cut them and get nothing. Yet, it continually happens in the NFL. I find it surprising year after year. Nonetheless it happens. Players far better than CM have been cut.

Right. Cecil Collins, for example, back in the day.

 

[Alluro]

CHRISTINE MICHAEL WANTS TO TAKE HIS TALENTS TO DALLAS?

By Brian Tesch, Seahawks Correspondent, Wed, Jul 22nd 10:03pm EDT

Seahawks RB Christine Micahel retweeted a tweet stating "@ChadParsonsNFL Why can't the Cowboys just pull off a trade with SEA and get RB @Cmike33 and make us all happy? #FantasyFootball #dynasty", possibly indicating his desire to leave the Seahawks, (Christine Michael via Twitter)

http://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/news/39755/christine-michael-wants-to-take-his-talents-to-dallas.php

 

[BigSteelThrill]

CHRISTINE MICHAEL WANTS TO TAKE HIS TALENTS TO DALLAS?

By Brian Tesch, Seahawks Correspondent, Wed, Jul 22nd 10:03pm EDT

Seahawks RB Christine Micahel retweeted a tweet stating "@ChadParsonsNFL Why can't the Cowboys just pull off a trade with SEA and get RB @Cmike33 and make us all happy? #FantasyFootball #dynasty", possibly indicating his desire to leave the Seahawks, (Christine Michael via Twitter)

http://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/news/39755/christine-michael-wants-to-take-his-talents-to-dallas.php

LOL. Look at that teamplayer! :X

 

[Sabertooth]

Let's hope.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

CHRISTINE MICHAEL WANTS TO TAKE HIS TALENTS TO DALLAS?

By Brian Tesch, Seahawks Correspondent, Wed, Jul 22nd 10:03pm EDT

Seahawks RB Christine Micahel retweeted a tweet stating "@ChadParsonsNFL Why can't the Cowboys just pull off a trade with SEA and get RB @Cmike33 and make us all happy? #FantasyFootball #dynasty", possibly indicating his desire to leave the Seahawks, (Christine Michael via Twitter)

http://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/news/39755/christine-michael-wants-to-take-his-talents-to-dallas.php

Jesus. What an idiot.

 

[Sabertooth]

If Michael were to get released, he'd be subject to waivers right?

 

[KCBuc]

This is why I hold on to him in dynasty formats because as soon as I trade him for nothing, he will be worth a whole lot. Of course if i keep him, he sits on the bench for the next three years and wastes precious roster space. Please make this happen Seattle.

CHRISTINE MICHAEL WANTS TO TAKE HIS TALENTS TO DALLAS?
By Brian Tesch, Seahawks Correspondent, Wed, Jul 22nd 10:03pm EDT

Seahawks RB Christine Micahel retweeted a tweet stating "@ChadParsonsNFL Why can't the Cowboys just pull off a trade with SEA and get RB @Cmike33 and make us all happy? #FantasyFootball #dynasty", possibly indicating his desire to leave the Seahawks, (Christine Michael via Twitter)

http://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/news/39755/christine-michael-wants-to-take-his-talents-to-dallas.php

 

[The Man With No Name]

If Michael were to get released, he'd be subject to waivers right?

Yes. Tampa Bay would have first shot at him followed by Tennessee, etc.

 

[Dezbelief]

I don't see him getting cut, a trade far more likely even if it's conditional. His low value now just as extreme as his high value a year or 2 ago.

Getting cut is far more likely than getting traded. How many times to you see a 3rd string RB get traded? Teams will just wait until he's cut.

If Zac Stacy has enough value to be traded, then so would Christine Michael.

You honestly don't think a team would pay a conditional 7th round pick for a player like Christine Michael? If the Seahawks were honestly going to cut him, they would take anything for him.

Zac showed pretty well in extended use for an offensively defunct team.

While his quality isnt exceptional, it is a known and useable quality.

That and it always seems great in theory to trade guys for something rather than just cut them and get nothing. Yet, it continually happens in the NFL. I find it surprising year after year. Nonetheless it happens. Players far better than CM have been cut.

Right. Cecil Collins, for example, back in the day.

Aren't supplemental picks awarded based on your FAs/released players getting picked up by other teams.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I don't see him getting cut, a trade far more likely even if it's conditional. His low value now just as extreme as his high value a year or 2 ago.

Getting cut is far more likely than getting traded. How many times to you see a 3rd string RB get traded? Teams will just wait until he's cut.

If Zac Stacy has enough value to be traded, then so would Christine Michael.

You honestly don't think a team would pay a conditional 7th round pick for a player like Christine Michael? If the Seahawks were honestly going to cut him, they would take anything for him.

Zac showed pretty well in extended use for an offensively defunct team.

While his quality isnt exceptional, it is a known and useable quality.

That and it always seems great in theory to trade guys for something rather than just cut them and get nothing. Yet, it continually happens in the NFL. I find it surprising year after year. Nonetheless it happens. Players far better than CM have been cut.

Right. Cecil Collins, for example, back in the day.

Aren't supplemental picks awarded based on your FAs/released players getting picked up by other teams.

Not released. Only FAs.

 

[spreagle]

He has to get out of there, his career is rotting in Seattle behind Lynch. He needs to demand a trade. He'll be 26 with no game action when he becomes a free agent, and no one will want him, might as well take a cheap rookie instead rather than an expensive disgruntled RB past his prime.

 

[Milkman]

If he can't beat Turbin out why would he start for the Cowboys?

 

[Chaka]

If he can't beat Turbin out why would he start for the Cowboys?

Because he's the next Adrian Peterson or some such.

 

[Tool]

If he can't beat Turbin out why would he start for the Cowboys?

Well, Turbin would probably start for the Cowboys.

 

[cr8f]

If he can't beat Turbin out why would he start for the Cowboys?

I don't know why they didn't use him more. I'm not going to guess, rather I'll wait and see how they use him VS Rawls this training camp. Hang on camp starts in a little over a week.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

If he can't beat Turbin out why would he start for the Cowboys?

I don't know why they didn't use him more. I'm not going to guess, rather I'll wait and see how they use him VS Rawls this training camp. Hang on camp starts in a little over a week.

You dont have to guess... it was stated in this very thread during his first training camp and preseason.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

If he can't beat Turbin out why would he start for the Cowboys?

I don't know why they didn't use him more. I'm not going to guess, rather I'll wait and see how they use him VS Rawls this training camp. Hang on camp starts in a little over a week.

They dont use him more because hes behind a hof caliber rb in lynch

 

[Sabertooth]

And Turbin

 

[Milkman]

I was on the wagon as much as anybody but just to many negatives to ignore at this point.

 

[carverlee]

If he can't beat Turbin out why would he start for the Cowboys?

Like how Lynch couldn't shake Fred Jackson?

 

[Sabertooth]

True, very true.

 

[humpback]

If he can't beat Turbin out why would he start for the Cowboys?

Like how Lynch couldn't shake Fred Jackson?

Not really, considering Lynch started over Jackson for the first ~2 1/2 years.