So when Lynch is back...

[Cartire]

Nothing I've seen from Lynch THIS season suggests he should be the starter when he comes back.

I agree to an extent but if Lynch comes back he is the starter. He has earned that. If things continue the way they are it would complicate things way less if Lynch didn't make it back. I really can't imagine them bringing Lynch back next year with all the money they can save by letting him go with a very capable person to step in. It would be sad to see him go like that but I'm a realist. I think Marshawn still has plenty left but I think Rawls is a better fit with the current offense because he hits the hole quicker.

That goes against Petes philosophy. You don't earn the starting role by being the incumbent. Best player for the job. Competition.

 

[aawolf]

Lynch should start........

As a Fullback! Seriously, I like that idea where they are both in the backfield at the same time. Lynch can lay the wood and Rawls can run up behind him.

 

[theENGLISHseahawk]

Rawls has earned the right to be the starter.

 

[NOLAHawk]

Seahawks have a history of releasing players too soon. Ml needs healing. He was CUT open. Hernias are common but not minor. I'm sure they are not stretching this calf, hammie quads or otherwise. R&R. It will take a month of rehab after the stitches come out for him to jog much less pound. He's superhuman so maybe it's six weeks. Definitely not back in two.

 

[Cartire]

Seahawks have a history of releasing players too soon. Ml needs healing. He was CUT open. Hernias are common but not minor. I'm sure they are not stretching this calf, hammie quads or otherwise. R&R. It will take a month of rehab after the stitches come out for him to jog much less pound. He's superhuman so maybe it's six weeks. Definitely not back in two.

A history of releasing players too soon? Who?

The biggest reason teams falter year to year is because they DONT release players soon enough.

 

[Scottemojo]

I think you have to make a decision. Committees just don't work in the NFL.

And right now, Rawls is the guy.

In addition, I have to suspect Lynch will not be 100% this year. He is a core strength player coming off a surgery to his core.
In 2011, would we have this discussion? Back when being an established vet meant little here in Seattle?

 

[themunn]

I'm still not ready to anoint Rawls just yet - in 5 starts he's had 2 amazing games, 2 good games and 1 poor game. The future looks good for him, and if he balls out the next 4 games it will be tough to turn to Lynch in the playoffs given his lack of game time.

What that said Lynch is one of the greatest postseason running backs in NFL history, if he's truly back to 100% then I think he has to be the guy.
And if having Lynch AND Rawls in the backfield means we can ram the ball down the opposition's throat 35-40 times, we'll be in an excellent position to control those games.

 

[theENGLISHseahawk]

I'm still not ready to anoint Rawls just yet - in 5 starts he's had 2 amazing games, 2 good games and 1 poor game. The future looks good for him, and if he balls out the next 4 games it will be tough to turn to Lynch in the playoffs given his lack of game time.

What that said Lynch is one of the greatest postseason running backs in NFL history, if he's truly back to 100% then I think he has to be the guy.
And if having Lynch AND Rawls in the backfield means we can ram the ball down the opposition's throat 35-40 times, we'll be in an excellent position to control those games.

He's had six starts FWIW. The one 'poor' game he actually split carries with Lynch in what was arguably the O-line's crappiest game of the year against Detroit.

The other five have pretty much all been amazing. He's knocking on the door of 1000 yards after several starts. He's the 10th leading rusher in the NFL with 141 carries. For perspective -- Adrian Peterson, who leads the NFL in rushing, has had 245 carries. It's not ridiculous based on this form to suggest Rawls has a legit shot at being the NFL's leading rusher next season.

His yards per carry average is 5.6 -- the highest in the NFL for any RB with +100 touches. Which is incredible after 141 carries. Peterson's is 4.8.

Rawls has taken this job away.

It's hard to make a case for Lynch that isn't based purely on sentimental reasons. The Seahawks of 2015 are simply better with Thomas Rawls running the ball.

 

[BadgerVid]

Work him back in. Don't just replace him with Rawls.
Love me the Beast, though, its still his team.

Rawls will have his time if he doesn't get snagged from us. What's his contract situation?

Oh, and what a terrible predicament we have here.

The one thing that has changed since Marshawn has been out is that it is now Wilson's team and the offense is finally rolling. Marshawn carried us for so long that they have had a hard time moving in another direction but the offense is clicking right now. I think Rawls is under our control for a few years just like a drafted rookie.

Rawls is in year 1 of a 3 yr just under $1.6M total contract...and will be a restricted FA in '18. 'Hawks definitely in the driver's seat.

 

[themunn]

Lynch didn't play a single snap in the Detroit game, and in the games which they HAVE split carries, they haven't been that wildly different in production.

As it stands, 6 games is still not enough for me to disregard Lynch completely - had I made up my mind on Lynch after his first 6 games (81 carries for 253 yards at 3.1 YPC), well, I'd have made a mistake.

To me, Lynch's running didn't look all that much different than it has in previous years - he's ALWAYS been slow to hit the hole (which has been my argument as to why he wouldn't have put up better numbers than Alexander with the 2005 line), and rarely put up strong numbers in the first half of games. Whenever we ran the ball it was almost always between the tackles (which is why defenses could afford to stack the box), and it wouldn't be until the 4th Q that Lynch put up strong numbers as tacklers got a half step slower and Lynch was able to just slide right past them - I have real trouble believing that if Lynch was fully fit we'd have lost the Carolina and Cincinnati games, as our 4th quarter running in both games was abysmal.

Rawls 5.6 YPC is awesome yes - in fact, it's better than any season of Lynch's career by a significant margin - but that's mostly down to his big runs (7 runs of over 20 yards already), something Lynch has never been great at (only hit 7 or more runs of 20 yards in a season twice, and maxed out at 9).

 

[CalgaryHawk]

Seahawks have a history of releasing players too soon. Ml needs healing. He was CUT open. Hernias are common but not minor. I'm sure they are not stretching this calf, hammie quads or otherwise. R&R. It will take a month of rehab after the stitches come out for him to jog much less pound. He's superhuman so maybe it's six weeks. Definitely not back in two.

A history of releasing players too soon? Who?

The biggest reason teams falter year to year is because they DONT release players soon enough.

A few players have been released here who have gone on to nice careers. I was angry when Jay Howard was released just when he was starting to make some nice plays in the preseason for the Hawks, and he's gone on to be a very solid starter for the Chiefs.

Spencer Ware is having a nice year for the Chiefs also.

There's probably a few others. It's gonna happen when you have such a talented roster.

And in the Ruskell era, releasing Bennett to keep 2 field goal kickers was asinine.

 

[Cartire]

Seahawks have a history of releasing players too soon. Ml needs healing. He was CUT open. Hernias are common but not minor. I'm sure they are not stretching this calf, hammie quads or otherwise. R&R. It will take a month of rehab after the stitches come out for him to jog much less pound. He's superhuman so maybe it's six weeks. Definitely not back in two.

A history of releasing players too soon? Who?

The biggest reason teams falter year to year is because they DONT release players soon enough.

A few players have been released here who have gone on to nice careers. I was angry when Jay Howard was released just when he was starting to make some nice plays in the preseason for the Hawks, and he's gone on to be a very solid starter for the Chiefs.

Spencer Ware is having a nice year for the Chiefs also.

There's probably a few others. It's gonna happen when you have such a talented roster.

And in the Ruskell era, releasing Bennett to keep 2 field goal kickers was asinine.

Ware is doing ok the last few games. He's hardly having a great season as he was barely playing until Charles went down. And where would ware fit into our RB's the last few years. Our run game has been pretty strong wouldn't you say?

Seems like a real stretch to say we have a history of releasing players too early. Especially when most the names you mentioned arent that special. And it's also weird that you include the Ruskell era as if it has any bearing on this team.

Just a weird thing to say. You could say that about every team if you want to include guys that have played at all after being released.

 

[CalgaryHawk]

Seahawks have a history of releasing players too soon. Ml needs healing. He was CUT open. Hernias are common but not minor. I'm sure they are not stretching this calf, hammie quads or otherwise. R&R. It will take a month of rehab after the stitches come out for him to jog much less pound. He's superhuman so maybe it's six weeks. Definitely not back in two.

A history of releasing players too soon? Who?

The biggest reason teams falter year to year is because they DONT release players soon enough.

A few players have been released here who have gone on to nice careers. I was angry when Jay Howard was released just when he was starting to make some nice plays in the preseason for the Hawks, and he's gone on to be a very solid starter for the Chiefs.

Spencer Ware is having a nice year for the Chiefs also.

There's probably a few others. It's gonna happen when you have such a talented roster.

And in the Ruskell era, releasing Bennett to keep 2 field goal kickers was asinine.

Ware is doing ok the last few games. He's hardly having a great season as he was barely playing until Charles went down. And where would ware fit into our RB's the last few years. Our run game has been pretty strong wouldn't you say?

Seems like a real stretch to say we have a history of releasing players too early. Especially when most the names you mentioned arent that special. And it's also weird that you include the Ruskell era as if it has any bearing on this team.

Just a weird thing to say. You could say that about every team if you want to include guys that have played at all after being released.

My mistake, I thought you were asking a genuine question above asking for examples of players who may have been released too soon by the Hawks. But I see now your question was rhetorical. Carry on.

Back to the main thread topic, if Lynch isn't feeling completely healed by the time the playoffs start, I think there's some question about how motivated he would be to play another game if he's intending to retire after the season anyway. Especially if he sees Rawls continue to play well and senses the Hawks have moved on from him.

I hope I'm wrong about that, becaues I think Lynch even in a backup role would be a big boost for the Hawks in the playoffs - teammates love him.

 

[Seahawk]

Lynch should start........

As a Fullback! Seriously, I like that idea where they are both in the backfield at the same time. Lynch can lay the wood and Rawls can run up behind him.

HAH! Imagine the look of fear in the faces of defenders facing that backfield. That would be amazing!