What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Christine Michael (5 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Interesting. It almost seems like they think they are down by 14. Need to score before the 2 minute warning or it doesn't count?

 
Putting him in cold on a key play like that was dumb. Also, can't figure out why they aren't feeding Randle. He's no Murray, but he's clearly the best back and why not feed him for a game and see what happens. Might end up with a Devonta Freeman.

 
Putting him in cold on a key play like that was dumb. Also, can't figure out why they aren't feeding Randle. He's no Murray, but he's clearly the best back and why not feed him for a game and see what happens. Might end up with a Devonta Freeman.
I'm convinced McFadden has compromising pictures of Jerry Jones dressed up as an Arkansas cheerleader.

 
I'm beginning to wonder why they even activated him if this was their "plan" for him.

Maybe he has an aura like the character in a moba computer game. C-Mike's presence on the battlefield causes +15 strength, +15 speed, and +15 agility to all allied warriors within a 100 yard radius.
They activated him for depth. The notion that he was going to get 5-20 touches was completely absurd.It's amazing how blind people can become to "their" players.
Are you suggesting that it's normal for teams to dress a 4th RB for "depth" when said RB doesn't play special teams?It was pretty reasonable to assume that they activated him to actually use him in some capacity.
You can reason your way into anything. The fact is they haven't put him on the field, at all, yet.
Dressing a 4th RB who doesn't play special teams for "depth" is far from normal practice. It was perfectly reasonable to assume that the Cowboys would use Michael in some capacity if they activated, and the inherent logic of that was evidenced by the overwhelming number of outside observers (fans, writers, analysts, etc.) who came to that very conclusion. Claiming that such a belief is the product of bias simply doesn't pass the smell test.
The bias was the 5-20 touches.
Anyone who flat-out expected 20 touches, sure, but that's not the way that quote reads to me and I doubt that's the way it was intended (since 5 carries was included in the range).

All I take from that is that he might hardly be used at all, or he might be heavily featured, or anything in between...nothing would surprise.

 
I'm beginning to wonder why they even activated him if this was their "plan" for him.

Maybe he has an aura like the character in a moba computer game. C-Mike's presence on the battlefield causes +15 strength, +15 speed, and +15 agility to all allied warriors within a 100 yard radius.
They activated him for depth. The notion that he was going to get 5-20 touches was completely absurd.It's amazing how blind people can become to "their" players.
Are you suggesting that it's normal for teams to dress a 4th RB for "depth" when said RB doesn't play special teams?It was pretty reasonable to assume that they activated him to actually use him in some capacity.
You can reason your way into anything. The fact is they haven't put him on the field, at all, yet.
Dressing a 4th RB who doesn't play special teams for "depth" is far from normal practice. It was perfectly reasonable to assume that the Cowboys would use Michael in some capacity if they activated, and the inherent logic of that was evidenced by the overwhelming number of outside observers (fans, writers, analysts, etc.) who came to that very conclusion. Claiming that such a belief is the product of bias simply doesn't pass the smell test.
The bias was the 5-20 touches.
Anyone who flat-out expected 20 touches, sure, but that's not the way that quote reads to me and I doubt that's the way it was intended (since 5 carries was included in the range). All I take from that is that he might hardly be used at all, or he might be heavily featured, or anything in between...nothing would surprise.
The notion that he would be heavily featured is absurd. That is the point.
 
I'm beginning to wonder why they even activated him if this was their "plan" for him.

Maybe he has an aura like the character in a moba computer game. C-Mike's presence on the battlefield causes +15 strength, +15 speed, and +15 agility to all allied warriors within a 100 yard radius.
They activated him for depth. The notion that he was going to get 5-20 touches was completely absurd.It's amazing how blind people can become to "their" players.
Are you suggesting that it's normal for teams to dress a 4th RB for "depth" when said RB doesn't play special teams?It was pretty reasonable to assume that they activated him to actually use him in some capacity.
You can reason your way into anything. The fact is they haven't put him on the field, at all, yet.
Dressing a 4th RB who doesn't play special teams for "depth" is far from normal practice. It was perfectly reasonable to assume that the Cowboys would use Michael in some capacity if they activated, and the inherent logic of that was evidenced by the overwhelming number of outside observers (fans, writers, analysts, etc.) who came to that very conclusion. Claiming that such a belief is the product of bias simply doesn't pass the smell test.
The bias was the 5-20 touches.
Anyone who flat-out expected 20 touches, sure, but that's not the way that quote reads to me and I doubt that's the way it was intended (since 5 carries was included in the range). All I take from that is that he might hardly be used at all, or he might be heavily featured, or anything in between...nothing would surprise.
The notion that he would be heavily featured is absurd. That is the point.
Five touches is hardly "heavily featured."

Why do you refuse to acknowledge the extremely wide range of possibilities contained in the phrase you are quoting? You're choosing to focus on half of what that phrase implies...and it just happens to be the half that makes the guy you're quoting look bad.

 
I'm beginning to wonder why they even activated him if this was their "plan" for him.

Maybe he has an aura like the character in a moba computer game. C-Mike's presence on the battlefield causes +15 strength, +15 speed, and +15 agility to all allied warriors within a 100 yard radius.
They activated him for depth. The notion that he was going to get 5-20 touches was completely absurd.It's amazing how blind people can become to "their" players.
Are you suggesting that it's normal for teams to dress a 4th RB for "depth" when said RB doesn't play special teams?It was pretty reasonable to assume that they activated him to actually use him in some capacity.
You can reason your way into anything. The fact is they haven't put him on the field, at all, yet.
Dressing a 4th RB who doesn't play special teams for "depth" is far from normal practice. It was perfectly reasonable to assume that the Cowboys would use Michael in some capacity if they activated, and the inherent logic of that was evidenced by the overwhelming number of outside observers (fans, writers, analysts, etc.) who came to that very conclusion. Claiming that such a belief is the product of bias simply doesn't pass the smell test.
The bias was the 5-20 touches.
Anyone who flat-out expected 20 touches, sure, but that's not the way that quote reads to me and I doubt that's the way it was intended (since 5 carries was included in the range). All I take from that is that he might hardly be used at all, or he might be heavily featured, or anything in between...nothing would surprise.
The notion that he would be heavily featured is absurd. That is the point.
Five touches is hardly "heavily featured." Why do you refuse to acknowledge the extremely wide range of possibilities contained in the phrase you are quoting? You're choosing to focus on half of what that phrase implies...and it just happens to be the half that makes the guy you're quoting look bad.
5 plays is all the Cowboys would have needed tonight if cm played them. That is heavily featured

 
I'm beginning to wonder why they even activated him if this was their "plan" for him.

Maybe he has an aura like the character in a moba computer game. C-Mike's presence on the battlefield causes +15 strength, +15 speed, and +15 agility to all allied warriors within a 100 yard radius.
They activated him for depth. The notion that he was going to get 5-20 touches was completely absurd.It's amazing how blind people can become to "their" players.
Are you suggesting that it's normal for teams to dress a 4th RB for "depth" when said RB doesn't play special teams?It was pretty reasonable to assume that they activated him to actually use him in some capacity.
You can reason your way into anything. The fact is they haven't put him on the field, at all, yet.
Dressing a 4th RB who doesn't play special teams for "depth" is far from normal practice. It was perfectly reasonable to assume that the Cowboys would use Michael in some capacity if they activated, and the inherent logic of that was evidenced by the overwhelming number of outside observers (fans, writers, analysts, etc.) who came to that very conclusion. Claiming that such a belief is the product of bias simply doesn't pass the smell test.
The bias was the 5-20 touches.
Anyone who flat-out expected 20 touches, sure, but that's not the way that quote reads to me and I doubt that's the way it was intended (since 5 carries was included in the range). All I take from that is that he might hardly be used at all, or he might be heavily featured, or anything in between...nothing would surprise.
The notion that he would be heavily featured is absurd. That is the point.
Five touches is hardly "heavily featured." Why do you refuse to acknowledge the extremely wide range of possibilities contained in the phrase you are quoting? You're choosing to focus on half of what that phrase implies...and it just happens to be the half that makes the guy you're quoting look bad.
I'm capturing the entire range....that is again the point. I'm not going to keep helping you see it.
 
They were saving him for OT all along.

(just kidding they will keep running McFadden at 2.2 YPC and lose the game)

 
I'm beginning to wonder why they even activated him if this was their "plan" for him.

Maybe he has an aura like the character in a moba computer game. C-Mike's presence on the battlefield causes +15 strength, +15 speed, and +15 agility to all allied warriors within a 100 yard radius.
They activated him for depth. The notion that he was going to get 5-20 touches was completely absurd.It's amazing how blind people can become to "their" players.
Are you suggesting that it's normal for teams to dress a 4th RB for "depth" when said RB doesn't play special teams?It was pretty reasonable to assume that they activated him to actually use him in some capacity.
You can reason your way into anything. The fact is they haven't put him on the field, at all, yet.
Dressing a 4th RB who doesn't play special teams for "depth" is far from normal practice. It was perfectly reasonable to assume that the Cowboys would use Michael in some capacity if they activated, and the inherent logic of that was evidenced by the overwhelming number of outside observers (fans, writers, analysts, etc.) who came to that very conclusion. Claiming that such a belief is the product of bias simply doesn't pass the smell test.
The bias was the 5-20 touches.
Anyone who flat-out expected 20 touches, sure, but that's not the way that quote reads to me and I doubt that's the way it was intended (since 5 carries was included in the range). All I take from that is that he might hardly be used at all, or he might be heavily featured, or anything in between...nothing would surprise.
The notion that he would be heavily featured is absurd. That is the point.
Five touches is hardly "heavily featured." Why do you refuse to acknowledge the extremely wide range of possibilities contained in the phrase you are quoting? You're choosing to focus on half of what that phrase implies...and it just happens to be the half that makes the guy you're quoting look bad.
I'm capturing the entire range....that is again the point. I'm not going to keep helping you see it.
I don't need help seeing anything.

"The notion that he would get 5-20 touches was completely absurd" is explicitly stating that expecting any outcome in that range was absurd.

It wasn't.

If conveying that wasn't your original intention, then you expressed yourself poorly up front. If that's exactly what you meant to express, then I think you're missing the mark on what was a reasonable expectation and we can agree to disagree to that effect.

 
I would say his role will increase next week, but the Cowboys seem hellbent on sticking with this Randle/DMC pair. At this point their logic eludes me entirely. I half expect them to sign Felix Jones and give him the start next week.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top