Thomas Rawls will start running (off crutches)

http://mynorthwest.com/292/2943109/Seahawks-Thomas-Rawls-says-hell-resume-running-soon

Seahawks running back Thomas Rawls provided a bit of an update Thursday on his recovery from the ankle injury that ended his rookie season, saying he is now walking without crutches and that he'll resume running soon.

Click to expand...

Rawls led the NFL with a 5.6 yards-per-carry average and was on pace to top 1,000 yards rushing as a rookie last season when he went down on Dec. 13, fracturing his ankle and also sustaining some ligament damage. He said after Seattle's playoff loss that he expects to be ready for the start of next season. Coach Pete Carroll has expressed the same optimism.

Click to expand...

The update Rawls gave Thursday doesn't indicate anything definitive about his status for the start of next season, but it does suggest that he's on track considering training camp is still four months away.

Click to expand...

Hope T Rawls is ready for game one. Surprised he just got off the crutches. I have a feeling we will snag a few backs via the draft and udfa. Wouldn't be surprised if we draft two.

Feel free to lock if posted.
Didn't see it.

That's a long time on crutches, how long 4 or 5 months? sounds like more then a break to me. Although he could have been off crutches for a while and just limited on what he could do I guess as well, but that is still a long time, 6 weeks normal break to heal and then rehab if I recall.

Does make you wonder if the damage was extensive.

Very well could have been. A break doesn't always include ligament or even severe ligament damage, but it almost sounds like that's the case. It also begs the question if he'll be the same back before sometime in 2017.

When I had my ankle fixed I was told the longer I was off the tendons the better as they were badly torn. I had to have a plate and screws as it was a mess. Slightly less flexible is the only issue and he was not an ankle. So I believe he will be fine.

There was a decent example of this down in SF once upon a time. It took him a little over a year to get back to himself.

[youtube]5dgrjrp6jXE[/youtube]

vin.couve12":3vdjdlzj said:

Very well could have been. A break doesn't always include ligament or even severe ligament damage, but it almost sounds like that's the case. It also begs the question if he'll be the same back before sometime in 2017.

Click to expand...

They've always said he had ligament damage. Not sure why posters are surprised.

http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/seah ... vs-ravens/

Basis4day":2uzei1sl said:

vin.couve12":2uzei1sl said:

Very well could have been. A break doesn't always include ligament or even severe ligament damage, but it almost sounds like that's the case. It also begs the question if he'll be the same back before sometime in 2017.

Click to expand...

They've always said he had ligament damage. Not sure why posters are surprised.

http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/seah ... vs-ravens/

Click to expand...

I never really looked into it, honestly. At the time I was more concerned with the season than Rawls injury extent and sort of trusted in the reports that he should be ready for this season.

His just now being off crutches makes me question those reports. Not that he won't be practicing at all. I'm sure he will be, but I seriously doubt he's the same.

I figured we were going to draft a RB in this draft anyway, but now I don't really have any doubt. I still like Michael a lot, but he's been injury prone. Rawls being hurt the last 2 years he's played football doesn't lend any confidence either.

We have plenty of room to add competition at RB to our current roster. Whether that comes in the form of early pick rookies, late round rookies, UDFA, or veterans is a function of value and is not dependent on Rawls. His injury status is a big deal for our 2016 season but not that important for our 2016 draft.

Well that's good news!

AgentDib":19d68mhh said:

We have plenty of room to add competition at RB to our current roster. Whether that comes in the form of early pick rookies, late round rookies, UDFA, or veterans is a function of value and is not dependent on Rawls. His injury status is a big deal for our 2016 season but not that important for our 2016 draft.

Click to expand...

Well stated.

The extended recovery period with the crutches could explain the interest they are showing in Derrick Henry.

Basis4day":3a2358w3 said:

vin.couve12":3a2358w3 said:

Very well could have been. A break doesn't always include ligament or even severe ligament damage, but it almost sounds like that's the case. It also begs the question if he'll be the same back before sometime in 2017.

Click to expand...

They've always said he had ligament damage. Not sure why posters are surprised.

http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/seah ... vs-ravens/

Click to expand...

and it was quoted in the OP yet still wondering about it.



Also it would be weird if he ran on crutches.

Smellyman":4d9axiwc said:

Basis4day":4d9axiwc said:

vin.couve12":4d9axiwc said:

Very well could have been. A break doesn't always include ligament or even severe ligament damage, but it almost sounds like that's the case. It also begs the question if he'll be the same back before sometime in 2017.

Click to expand...

They've always said he had ligament damage. Not sure why posters are surprised.

http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/seah ... vs-ravens/

Click to expand...

and it was quoted in the OP yet still wondering about it.



Also it would be weird if he ran on crutches.

Click to expand...

Ha.

Anyway, since they have always told us about the ligament damage, any update we received on his status took it into consideration (Like when Pete spoke at the Owners meeting in March).

vin.couve12":1uioky00 said:

Very well could have been. A break doesn't always include ligament or even severe ligament damage, but it almost sounds like that's the case. It also begs the question if he'll be the same back before sometime in 2017.

Click to expand...

It's a fair question to ask. I love Thomas Rawls but we need some depth at the position. If not, we'll always be one injury away from C-Mike toting the rock on a consistent basis, and I'm not too excited to see that.

I'd love Derrick Henry in this draft. Spend one of those thirds on a legitimate NFL back, or grab Henry in the second. I wouldn't hate it.

While I am starting to think Henry will be a better pro than I thought a few weeks ago, I still don't think he would be in a Seahawks uniform. If there are going to be questions on Rawls going into the season I would prefer Kenneth Dixon over any other back not named E. Elliott. Michael is more of a question than an answer as the backup and I could see Dixon being a star in our offense. Go get him at 56 and we will be set even if we have to bring Rawls along slower than expected.

Still can't believe he was walking around on that thing on his own power after it happened. That is one tough dude!

edogg23":1d9f4mxq said:

Still can't believe he was walking around on that thing on his own power after it happened. That is one tough dude!

Click to expand...

It feels like your ankle is in a vise!

penihawk":1kdnyxhr said:

While I am starting to think Henry will be a better pro than I thought a few weeks ago, I still don't think he would be in a Seahawks uniform. If there are going to be questions on Rawls going into the season I would prefer Kenneth Dixon over any other back not named E. Elliott. Michael is more of a question than an answer as the backup and I could see Dixon being a star in our offense. Go get him at 56 and we will be set even if we have to bring Rawls along slower than expected.

Click to expand...

Michael is a backup RB. In the 3 games he started last year, he averaged 5.3 ypc, 6 ypc, and 3.3 ypc in the sub zero temperatures against a very good Minnesota defense. More importantly, he didn't fumble once. I find it hard to ask much more than that from a backup RB. Who has a much better backup than that in the league ?

That said, if there's injury concerns about Rawls, I don't see us drafting a scat back type 3rd down back. Dixon might be a good pick, but he's not explosive enough for the Seahawks, compared to their last draft picks at the position. I do like that Dixon looked comfortable running between the Tackles.

It's going to say a lot about Rawl's health (and their confidence in Michael) by watching the draft. If the Hawks go after a well rounded RB in the draft (also going a big higher) or if they go after an ultra athletic RB that is more suited to 3rd downs. The best news about the end of last year was watching Michael. He's always had all the talent and physical ability, but he mentally couldn't grasp the responsibilities of the position. It sure looked like he had that down last year, and if he can build off of that going into TC and get 2nd team reps, we could see him improve.