capncrunch
Member
Maybe they never planned on playing him that much but thought he would be great trade bait in the future.
The important reason for running the ball & play Christine
- Thread starter ivotuk
- Start date
Rose City Hawk":24oylwuq said:
Well, if their intent was to have a sensible pitch count for Lynch, spelling him with Turbin and Michael, but Michael isn't capable, your comment "I just have to trust in the FO at this point that they know a helluva lot more than any of us pretend to" is somewhat conflicting.
Not suggesting we know more about "jacksh*t than they do, but let's be real, who actually thinks the FO used our top pick on Michael with the plan that he'd sit the entire year out? I would find that highly suspect. And if that was their plan, I'm going to say it wasn't a very good one.
capncrunch":2wrzy92p said:
I still think we were shopping him to Indy prior to the Richardson deal. Most argue that but I can't understand why that would be so far-fetched. IF Michael is as advertised, Indy should have been calling us, actually. Richardson is much better than most want to give him credit for, but he's more workhorse than dangerous. In today's league, your back needs to offer more than just a talent for killing clock.
Rose City Hawk
New member
HawkWow":1rzoi1wm said:
I'm not sure what part of my comment is conflicting.
As far as why we aren't using him, I couldn't tell ya, that's what the FO and coaching staff get paid to do.
Rose City Hawk":37bdohp7 said:
I was referring to your suggestion that ML is on a pitch count but the FO is not activating Michael. Merely pointing out that if they drafted Michael to spell Lynch, someone, somewhere missed something. Cuz at this rate, he's a hella long way from that objective. My sarcasm is not directed towards you, but the FO, as all knowing as they may allegedly be.
Rose City Hawk
New member
Gotcha, I wasn't trying to draw a parallel to ML being on a pitch count and Michael not being activated. Pretty much to sum up my statement I was just saying I think that speculation about this kind of thing is beyond most of our understanding. I would love to know the why's on this kind of thing but I think you have to know the right people and probably wouldn't be on this board talking about it lol. No offense taken by your reply.
Cool. None intended.
I am fearful we might have missed on Michael and thus the source of my frustration. Something's not adding up here. Someone is going to come in with a " we got a guy with 1st rd value in the 2nd rd...THAT'S why we drafted Michael". That would be incorrect. Michael did not have 1st rd value or he woulda' went in the 1st rd.
He may have 1st rd talent, but that was diminished by poor attitude and a habit of putting the ball on the carpet. I think we got ahead of ourselves with Michael. Even if he tears it up next year, it is likely a lower drafted back will out-perform him. The only way using a 2nd on Michael made sense, IMO, is if we got production out of him this year. That clearly is not happening.
I am fearful we might have missed on Michael and thus the source of my frustration. Something's not adding up here. Someone is going to come in with a " we got a guy with 1st rd value in the 2nd rd...THAT'S why we drafted Michael". That would be incorrect. Michael did not have 1st rd value or he woulda' went in the 1st rd.
He may have 1st rd talent, but that was diminished by poor attitude and a habit of putting the ball on the carpet. I think we got ahead of ourselves with Michael. Even if he tears it up next year, it is likely a lower drafted back will out-perform him. The only way using a 2nd on Michael made sense, IMO, is if we got production out of him this year. That clearly is not happening.
Joey13091
Member
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2012
- Messages
- 887
- Reaction score
- 2
His time will come.
CortezKennedyfan
New member
DavidSeven":3imux62t said:
I think we are 2nd in rush attempts because our QB has had to run for his life.
CortezKennedyfan
New member
I like C-Mike...but the fact is that he is the 3rd string back on this team.
There's only so many touches to go around.
There's only so many touches to go around.
OP
OP
ivotuk
Well-known member
CortezKennedyfan":2hmmz3xp said:
Pretty much spot on.
Jim Mora and Greg Knapp's Atlanta Falcons led the league in rushing one year, does that mean they were a great running team? No, it meant Michael Vick was running a lot.
Who here would want to have those two coaching based on that statistic? Oh wait...
I like the idea of sitting Rocket and putting Christine on KO returns. And the "CMike can't block statement has been floating around and getting bigger and bigger with no substantial evidence.
Then there's always the "the coaches know what they are doing." Did they know what they were doing when we were down 21-0? Or gave up 200 yards rushing to TB and St Louis? Without Russell Wilson, we lose both of those games, the Houston game and who knows how many more.
"The coaches" is a lame argument because it says we are supposed to accept everything at face value and not question the coaches. If that is so, why have a discussion board? Now if you just want to throw that out there because you are in a bad mood, don't like the post or the op, then more power to you, but as soon as the argument comes out, people quit taking you seriously.
And then there's the argument "we don't know what's going on." Again, weak argument that would eventually lead to no discussion.
I prefer throwing an argument out there and seeing what kind of points or counter points people come up with because there are a lot of people on here that come up with ideas I would never think of and I love hearing them.
But back to the original post, according to Sando: "I thought he took some really hard shots to the head, the left arm, the knee...the shot he took on the knee, those can be season enders...got up squeezing his left hand and I was watching him to see if he could even make the hand off...everyone has their limits and I think he is way closer to his than he has been as a pro."
So I'd like to see more runs to keep Russell from taking so many hits. And don't count how many "rushes" Seattle has without subtracting the ones RW made. He isn't a running back and with the Read/Option, teams are going to take shots on him the way SF did. He won't last long that way. One of these games Marshawn is going to go out and not come back. Wouldn't it be nice to have Christine Michael active?
hawk45
Active member
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2009
- Messages
- 10,009
- Reaction score
- 16
We can run the ball with any of our backs, not just Michael. Running the ball more to take pressure off of Russ is a good idea that in no way suggests it has to be Michael doing the running. So that is NOT a point in favor of activating Michael. Not even a little bit.
In this season of passing ineptitude and close-ass games, is this really the place for Michael to learn OTJ ? Maybe he's a great pass blocker, maybe he's a great runner, who gives a rip, we KNOW Marshawn is both of those things. We're in pursuit of a SB this year and that takes precedence over finding out what we have with Michael.
Of all the things the coaches get second-guessed for, this is just not the hill to die on. Even on this board I don't see it getting any traction. Dude if there was even a small opening to complain about coaches about this, trust me, I'd be first through it
In this season of passing ineptitude and close-ass games, is this really the place for Michael to learn OTJ ? Maybe he's a great pass blocker, maybe he's a great runner, who gives a rip, we KNOW Marshawn is both of those things. We're in pursuit of a SB this year and that takes precedence over finding out what we have with Michael.
Of all the things the coaches get second-guessed for, this is just not the hill to die on. Even on this board I don't see it getting any traction. Dude if there was even a small opening to complain about coaches about this, trust me, I'd be first through it
ChrisB Bacon
New member
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2012
- Messages
- 654
- Reaction score
- 0
One thing I've never understood about the "Can't block, automatic run" theory is that, if the defense is fully keyed on the run like suggested, a screen off a little play action would absolutely torch them. That's also something CMike seems like he'd excel at. I'd also like to see him get some touches, but there seems to be something going on that we're not aware of. 2nd rounders are supposed to come in and perform immediately, especially when the pick is a RB. This is complete speculation, and I have absolutely nothing to base this off of, but some possible reasons could be a lack of knowledge of the playbook, poor work ethic, poor attitude (self over team, not "all in"), fumble issues bigger problem than first thought, etc.
No team sits an explosive playmaker for no reason. There's got to be something going on behind the scenes, because he performed well in the preseason.
No team sits an explosive playmaker for no reason. There's got to be something going on behind the scenes, because he performed well in the preseason.
UGotHawked
New member
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2010
- Messages
- 392
- Reaction score
- 0
One other thing - this offense is searching for its identity right now. They have serious issues all along their front line, the QB is under siege, the passing game is a bit of a mess, and there appears to be a slow burn on going under the surface with your stud RB and the OC/play calling. With all that, THIS is the time some are clammoring for your rookie 3rd string RB? This is the best time to tell Marshawn that you will be taking more of his snaps away? Really?? :34853_doh:
