What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Christine Michael Volume 3: Inevitable Greatness Soon Achieved (1 Viewer)

Touchdown There said:
Are you in the Rawls thread or in the Cristine Michael thread?  Michael will continue to perform this year and, at BEST, Rawls will eat into Michael's carries late in the season.  I know you feel his 7 carries for -7 yards should earn him an automatic start when his leg heals because you own him on your fantasy team, but as I said in my post above, that is not how the NFL works.

The good news is that there is half the season left to play and coaches make the decision, not you or me.  Just sit back, relax, keep Rawls on your bench and watch Michael run.
Click to expand...
Please take your own advice.

 
Once Rawls is back, this is going to be a full blown rbbc and I won't be starting CMike anymore. 

Christine Michael has been a great return for where he was drafted though. I can't complain. Will keep on my bench incase Rawls gets another injury when he's back. 

 
Tommy Collins said:
@Touchdown There I think you need to relax buddy.

This means nothing, especially to the Seahawks. That organization starts more undrafted/late round guys that any other team in the league. Where they were drafted means nothing to them, and rightfully so.

Are you referencing some article on this injury or specific knowledge about it?

He has looked explosive. But what good is exploding if you're doing so into the backs of your OL or into defenders because you don't have the vision and patience to be an effective RB? Look at Le'Veon Bell. He's the best back in the league. When is the last time someone said he was explosive?
Click to expand...
I am completely relaxed.  Pretty sure the people that are not relaxed are the Rawls supporters in the wrong thread.  Let's face it, they drafted him pretty high and likely refused to drop him affecting their ability to play the waiver wire.

Where a player is drafted comes from who is better on tape in college.  The poster spouting "clearly better on tape" in regards to Rawls is pointing to 2015, not 2016 or college.  With the exception of last year with Michael's unfortunate situation, Michael has always looked better on tape.

Google your own articles on a broken fibula.

 
All this bickering in here is pretty funny, considering the only fact we know is that none of us know how things are going to shake out once Rawls is healthy.

Anyone who thinks they know is just making a guestimate like the rest of us. Heck, Pete Carroll probably won't know until he sees Rawls in action for a bit.

 
Touchdown There said:
Where a player is drafted comes from who is better on tape in college.  The poster spouting "clearly better on tape" in regards to Rawls is pointing to 2015, not 2016 or college.  With the exception of last year with Michael's unfortunate situation, Michael has always looked better on tape.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. It's all about value. Why draft a guy they love in the 2nd if they believe he's going to fly under the radar and be there in the 5th? If you don't think that happens, then you're out of touch with how the drafts work.

2015 HAS looked better on tape. He has field vision and can find open holes. Michael is the superior athlete, yes. But Rawls can do things that Michael cannot. His 2016 tape didn't look good, and he was coming back from injury. Like I said, he may not be 100% this year. But a healthy Rawls > CMike.

Referring to Michael's 2015 season as an unfortunate situation is putting it pretty mildly don't you think? The guy was drafted in the 2nd round and released by the team because they were not happy with him. I would call that more than unfortunate.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Touchdown There said:
Tommy, if you are interested in the friendly, please PM me.  If not, hit the Rawls thread.
Click to expand...
I'm not going to bet anything with anybody on here. I'm not on here pumping Rawls. But Rawls's return does have an impact on CMike's value, so it is relevant to discuss the two in here. If you don't like it, create a CMike Facebook group and you can make all the rules about what you discuss.

You're gung ho about Rawls not having an impact, that CMike is the superior runner, etc etc. Not a lot of people share those same feelings. Making aggressive responses to people isn't going to change that. Redirecting people out of the thread isn't your place.

Take your own advice: Watch the tape. CMike is a straight line, no vision runner. He may be "shout out of a cannon" but that doesn't prove helpful if you can't change direction or read the lanes/holes/defense.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Tommy Collins said:
I'm not going to bet anything with anybody on here. I'm not on here pumping Rawls. But Rawls's return does have an impact on CMike's value, so it is relevant to discuss the two in here. If you don't like it, create a CMike Facebook group and you can make all the rules about what you discuss.

You're gung ho about Rawls not having an impact, that CMike is the superior runner, etc etc. Not a lot of people share those same feelings. Making aggressive responses to people isn't going to change that. Redirecting people out of the thread isn't your place.

Take your own advice: Watch the tape. CMike is a straight line, no vision runner. He may be "shout out of a cannon" but that doesn't prove helpful if you can't change direction or read the lanes/holes/defense.
Click to expand...
Can't put money where your mouth is and posting in the wrong forum to intentionally stir up controversy.  That is the classic definition of a forum troll.  No one wants your watch the tape comments in this thread.  Take a hint. This thread is the appropriate place for the pro-Michael crowd to gather.  We can agree to disagree but you need to respect that and relax.  I am not in the Rawls forum asking you to watch Cristine Michael tape.

 
Touchdown There said:
Can't put money where your mouth is and posting in the wrong forum to intentionally stir up controversy.  That is the classic definition of a forum troll.  No one wants your watch the tape comments in this thread.  Take a hint. This thread is the appropriate place for the pro-Michael crowd to gather.  We can agree to disagree but you need to respect that and relax.  I am not in the Rawls forum asking you to watch Cristine Michael tape.
Click to expand...
If someone doesn't agree with you they are a troll. Good to know.

 
Touchdown There said:
This is the Cristine Michael thread.
Click to expand...
Yes, meaning discussion of Michael's situation is perfectly relevant. Rawls is relevant to Michael's situation.

IMO healthy Rawls > healthy Michael, and it's not close. I think the odds of Michael ever being a long term starting RB for any NFL team are minimal. IMO trading him is the smart move in dynasty if there is any market for him, though I doubt that is the case in most leagues.

You obviously disagree with my opinions, and there's nothing wrong with that. I'm not going to criticize you for it. Maybe you should try that approach and stop trying to dictate what people can post about in this or any other thread.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Touchdown There said:
First, let's clear something up.  This is the Cristine Michael thread.  If you want to support Rawls, go to the Rawls thread.  Do you see the irony in asking someone who believes in Christine Michael's talent and makes a pro-Michael post in the Christine Michael thread if they are "trolling"?  The troll is the person who is intentionally stirring up conflict in the wrong location.  Paid HIllary trolls in the Trump Reddit.  Pro-life supporters in front of the clinics.  This begs the question, why are you in here trolling?  Why did the original Michael thread get locked?

So you want to talk about tape.  Who watches more tape, you or the Seahawks paid scouts?  Rawls went undrafted, Michael was drafted in round 2 (pick 62).  So, on tape, the Seahawks paid professional staff value Michael's collegiate production and talent much, much greater than they ever did Rawls.  I have already posted Michael's YPC over the years.  Rawls was better last year because of his situation, but just like 1 <> 2, 2015 <> 2016. 

You have Rawls on your fantasy team and a 2015 vision of Rawls in your head.  This is 2016 and there is a long list of undrafted free agents who had one good year.  The real kicker is that you think a guy who just broke his fibula is going to jump right back in at #1.  Here is how it actually works.  For the last 6 weeks, Rawls has had his cast from his knee all the way down to his toes.  This means he was not running or doing any lower body weight room work leading to muscle atrophy.  The tendons have tightened.  His feet, ankles, calves and quads are all weak sauce.  It will take at least 2 weeks from cast removal to walk in a balanced way and no longer overcompensation to the leg that was not broken.  In 4 weeks he might have the leg strength of an average person.  From there you have to add in time for the athlete to get to an NFL level of strength and conditioning, because if he is not at that level you can be absolutely assured the leg weakness and mental hesitation will lead to a low YPC.

So are you buying Pete's comment on Rawls being back in a few weeks and then making the incorrect assumption that he is rolling straight into the #1 RB slot.  Please do put him in your starting lineup that week.

Christine Michael's tape speaks for itself at both the NFL and collegiate level.  He is the better talent.  Take a few minutes and Google the articles on Michael's re-awakening this year and the articles about him looking "shot out of a cannon".

Many different scenarios can play out this year.  The most likely of which is that Rawls is threatened by Michael's production and tries to come back early on a weak leg.  This will lead to a drastic YPC difference between Michael and Rawls and he risks losing the job permanently.  The smart play is to come back after 5-6 weeks of strength and conditioning and hoping the coaches like you enough to put you back as the starter.  In this scenario, he will look much better on the field into the playoffs and regaining the lead role next year.  A third, and not small possibility is that his leg is re-injured.

If any pro-Rawls troll in the wrong thread want to put their money where there mouth is, just PM me for a friendly wager.  When Rawls comes back, he will have a lower YPC than Michael for the remainder of the year.  Let's end the back and forth with a friendly and then just let the season play out.
Click to expand...
I'm wondering how in the world you know Rawls is in a cast "from his knee all the way down to his toes", and has been doing zero strength and conditioning work for 6 weeks.

 
Touchdown There said:
Can't put money where your mouth is and posting in the wrong forum to intentionally stir up controversy.  That is the classic definition of a forum troll.  No one wants your watch the tape comments in this thread.  Take a hint. This thread is the appropriate place for the pro-Michael crowd to gather.  We can agree to disagree but you need to respect that and relax.  I am not in the Rawls forum asking you to watch Cristine Michael tape.
Click to expand...
No, it's the place for anyone with an interest in Michael and his circumstances to discuss him, and those circumstances.  It's not a pep rally.

 
Touchdown There said:
Nope, simple as you being in the wrong thread.  You can disagree with me all you want in the Rawls thread, I and the other Michael supporters will not be in there trolling you.  Here is the appropriate link for Rawls discussion, of course you are aware of the proper thread because you posted that you traded Michael away:  https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/topic/731957-thomas-rawls-rb-cmuseahawks/?page=23#comment-19546386
Click to expand...
:jawdrop:

Call 911-thread police. Somebody posted about how Rawls returning could affect Michael in the Michael thread!?!?

That's like posting about peanut butter in the jelly thread. CRAZY!  :crazy:  

 
I moved him for an early 2nd and 4th yesterday. He's been great, but his time is coming to an end most likely. That SEA backfield is gonna be nasty week to week once Rawls comes back. 

 
It doesn't matter who the starting RB in Seatlle is if Bevell only calls 14 running plays a game.  If anyone should be traded, it's Bevell...though I don't know if anyone would take him... :(

Only 10 rushing attempts for Michael who averaged 4 ypc against NO.  I don't know if you saw the 1st series of the 2nd half of that game, but for a at least a portion of that series Bevell called running play after running play resulting in 4 1st downs...then inexplicably went away from it.  In that series Michael was decisive and explosive.  I sincerely believe that had Bevell continued to feed Michael with an agressive north-south running attack against the Saints, Seattle would have won the game...but I digress.

There's a lot to like about Michael.  He runs hard and is very quick once he plants and goes.  His running style reminds me some of Ahman Green back in the day with terrific forward lean and low shoulder pad.  However, I do wish he played as aggressively as Green, who wasn't afraid to sometimes punish a would be tackler.  On a couple of occasions this year I've seen Michael let up and head out of bounds, leaving some potential yardage on the field for the sake of not being hit.

I think that's one of the reasons Seattle coaching staff are excited to get Rawls back and contributing...to try and give the offense a little more 'attitude'.  That said, I really don't believe that a healthy Rawls would have had any greater success behind this line than Michael has, especially if used in similar fashion.  Only time will tell if Seattle re-commits to Rawls as the featured back, but after watching every Seattle game this year, I believe it safe to say that Michael has not been utilized to his fullest potential.

If Seattle is serious about re-establishing the running game and getting back some swagger on offense...there's no reason to wait until Rawls is healthy, Michael is more than capable of carrying the load, but unfortunately that may never happen with Bevell as OC.

 
The RBs coach in Seattle said Michael is leaving yards on the field... Only getting what is blocked and he thinks there is more there.   That is not good. 

 
kittenmittens said:
The RBs coach in Seattle said Michael is leaving yards on the field... Only getting what is blocked and he thinks there is more there.   That is not good. 
Click to expand...
From what I've seen, it kind of makes sense.

He hits the hole super hard and looks explosive (lol) but he doesn't do a whole lot after that it seems.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
So, admittedly I'm stuck starting him in one league where I could use a solid game tonight... also considering in DFS.  What're you guys expecting tonight?  Do they actually give him the workload and let him get rolling, or is it more Prosise, or is it Russell trying to throw it everywhere?

 
Expectations for tonight?  More of the same from Bevell.  I'd be shocked if the Seahawks heavily featured Michael at this point and anticipate something around 14-60 and maybe 2 catches for another 10, with possibility for a TD,

Considering the game plan(s?) Bevell has rolled out the last few weeks, I think it unrealistic to expect anything more.

 
Duffy said:
Expectations for tonight?  More of the same from Bevell.  I'd be shocked if the Seahawks heavily featured Michael at this point and anticipate something around 14-60 and maybe 2 catches for another 10, with possibility for a TD,

Considering the game plan(s?) Bevell has rolled out the last few weeks, I think it unrealistic to expect anything more.
Click to expand...
I have no clue what to make of seattle's offense rt now.   

 
Duffy said:
Expectations for tonight?  More of the same from Bevell.  I'd be shocked if the Seahawks heavily featured Michael at this point and anticipate something around 14-60 and maybe 2 catches for another 10, with possibility for a TD,

Considering the game plan(s?) Bevell has rolled out the last few weeks, I think it unrealistic to expect anything more.
Click to expand...
I'd be happy with a yard right about now.  Its almost halftime and he has a 0

 
Hoping for a better 2nd half but Michael may be droppable at this point. The Pats next week then Rawls is back with fresh legs for the stretch run.

 
True. I guess I should add that the situation bothers me too with Procise getting reps and Rawls around the corner. Don't think it ends well for CMike. Hope I'm wrong. 

 
In my short bench league I'll likely be dumping CMike this week (hanging on to Rawls).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The only thing that makes me hesitate is how infrequently they ran.  They had, what, 7 combined carries?  Doesn't look good, but I could see that usage changing in a run-heavier game.  In fact, I think Bevell screwed up by not running more late with either back.

 
Wow...I grossly overestimated Bevell's commitment to the running game...it really doesn't matter who is in the backfield.  Seattle has been saying how they want more intensity and physicality from the RB position...but when you only allocate 8 or so running plays to your RBs in an entire game...you're not a 'physical' offense...you're finesse.  This on the heals of 14 running plays vs NO last week...pretty clear how Bevell wants this offense to operate. 

I can only assume that Seattle may want to be able to run the football as we get further into the season...but I don't know if that's something where you can simply flip a switch and get it to work.  I have little confidence in any RB from Seattle being relevant until the offensive game plan becomes far more balanced.

At least Michael scored when given the opportunity.

 
Duffy said:
Wow...I grossly overestimated Bevell's commitment to the running game...it really doesn't matter who is in the backfield.  Seattle has been saying how they want more intensity and physicality from the RB position...but when you only allocate 8 or so running plays to your RBs in an entire game...you're not a 'physical' offense...you're finesse.  This on the heals of 14 running plays vs NO last week...pretty clear how Bevell wants this offense to operate. 

I can only assume that Seattle may want to be able to run the football as we get further into the season...but I don't know if that's something where you can simply flip a switch and get it to work.  I have little confidence in any RB from Seattle being relevant until the offensive game plan becomes far more balanced.

At least Michael scored when given the opportunity.
Click to expand...
Maybe 8 running plays is a product of neither Michael nor Prosise being capable of delivering the intensity and physicality they say they want.

If Rawls gives them that, then maybe the run plays increase accordingly.

 
That oline is a joke. Bunch a dudes who should be bagging groceries playing.  Add in 8 called runs? Bad coaching. I doubt rawls does much more given his poor health

 
davearm said:
Maybe 8 running plays is a product of neither Michael nor Prosise being capable of delivering the intensity and physicality they say they want.

If Rawls gives them that, then maybe the run plays increase accordingly.
Click to expand...
This, and a combination of being able to move the ball at will through the air. Why run for 1 or 2 yards when Buffalo's coverage can't stop the pass game? It's not that difficult of a concept. It's not as if the passing game wasn't moving the ball and they were doing well on the ground. The passing game was wide open and the run game was being stuffed on what they did call.

 
Christine Michael is not a good running back. He's also insane.

I've never had a really strong opinion about him because we never had an adequate sample size to work with. I've seen enough now though, I think he's bad.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top