Michael or Rawls

[Mistashoesta]

Guess I should have made this a poll. Who had the better performance? Go.

 

[Hawkpower]

Guess I should have made this a poll. Who had the better performance? Go.

Both played well at times.

Would probably call it a draw.

 

[DavidSeven]

Michael is slippery and his numbers were obviously better, but man, he is awful at finishing runs. Whether we're 9 yards out or 2 yards out, it's like you just know he'll dive somewhere inches short of the marker.

I prefer Rawls and hope we're just ramping him up. There is definitely a place for Michael as well, but I don't see him as the feature back on a team that wants to look physical.

 

[RussB]

I thought michael played better , rawls showed some flashes of what he looked like last season but seemed rusty and inconsistent. O line played pretty bad for the most part so it could be that too,.

 

[bigskydoc]

Rawls, and when he gets fully into game shape it won't even be close. Michael is still trying to hard.

 

[MrThortan]

Michael had 15 carries, 66 yards, 4.4 average : Receiving 2 catches 5 yards
Rawls had 12 carries, 32 yards, 2.7 average : Receiving 3 catches for 26 yards

One play Michael fell just short of a first down, and I was thinking with Rawls rush style he would have got it.
I didn't catch who was the better blocker. Personally I favor Rawls and think he is the better all around back. I really like the combination of him and Michael together. Would have liked to see the run established earlier in the game.

 

[andyh64000]

When healthy...Rawls and it is not even close. Michael dropped a critical 3rd down pass that almost cost us the game and he literally fell short on a 3rd down on the final drive that also could have cost us the game.

 

[Overseasfan]

Right now definitely Michael but when Rawls is 100% healthy he's simply better.

 

[Sports Hernia]

Michael is slippery and his numbers were obviously better, but man, he is awful at finishing runs. Whether we're 9 yards out or 2 yards out, it's like you just know he'll dive somewhere inches short of the marker.

I prefer Rawls and hope we're just ramping him up. There is definitely a place for Michael as well, but I don't see him as the feature back on a team that wants to look physical.

Agree.

 

[kearly]

I feel like Michael is better at transcending the defense. Against a tougher matchup, I think Michael is a better at creating good runs. Against average or better matchups, I think Rawls gives you more of a complete runner.

Part of what makes Michael good at this is that he runs extremely low, but that low running style often comes at the cost of balance and resiliency.

Michael had a knack for coming up an inch short on 1st and 2nd downs today. But on 3rd and 4th down type situations he seemed to be pretty good at maximizing his yardage. He seems like our best short yardage back at the moment.

 

[Greenhell]

Is it me or is Michael always slipping and falling?

 

[vin.couve12]

Michael pretty clearly. They're different though. Rawls has got good leg drive in a pile, but Michael is visibly more explosive and chews up yards faster.

The answer is both though. It will be a great 1-2 punch all year barring injury.

 

[joeseahawks]

Michael is just too focus on getting positive yardage and not fumbling the ball ... After a few yards , he just launches himself and goes to the ground ... The young man still needs confidence from the coaches.
Rawls is still rusty. When he gets going, he will be a massive asset, because he can operate even behind a bad O-Line and doesn't just go to the ground, instead challenges the second level.
Barring injuries, this will be Rawls job in a month.
Imagine this team with Arian Forster running the ball ...

 

[WestcoastSteve]

Michael pretty clearly. They're different though. Rawls has got good leg drive in a pile, but Michael is visibly more explosive and chews up yards faster.

The answer is both though. It will be a great 1-2 punch all year barring injury.

I think you said it so well, there are things each does better than the other. We've been spoiled to have a feature back the last 4-5 years but for most NFL teams this is what they have. Backs who compliment each other to give their team what they need.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

Why are people assuming Rawls isn't 100%? He has said himself he is good to go and does not think about his ankle.

Michael outplays Rawls...guess that means Rawls isn't 100%. :roll:

 

[WestcoastSteve]

Why are people assuming Rawls isn't 100%? He has said himself he is good to go and does not think about his ankle.

Michael outplays Rawls...guess that means Rawls isn't 100%. :roll:

I wlil say that on at least two plays Rawls was hit immediately after getting the ball, I would want to factor in blocking before I say one was significantly better than the other.

 

[Hawkpower]

It's almost like CM is overcompensating for his weaknesses when he first came in the league.

Now, he is so focused on running low, hard and straight, 10-12 yards and a fall seems to be his ceiling. But on a positive note we havent seen dancing or fumbles......

I think in order to take his game to the next level, he needs to relax a bit, and find a middle ground. He is capable of breaking off big runs of 30 plus yards if he keeps his head up, while still focusing on ball security and grinding out positive runs.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

Michael had a couple brilliant blitz pickups today. Didn't notice whether Rawls did or not.

 

[theincrediblesok]

Rawls is our bruiser and will get defenses tired of tackling him, Michael is quick and can tired the defense out.

Once Rawls gets back to playing like he use to, him and Michael will be that 1-2 punch that defenses would hate to be hit by.

 

[Tical21]

I miss Marshawn.