Rod Smith or Thomas Rawls

Whose better of the two? And who do you think will get C-Mike's spot? I know Rawls may be more explosive, but I like Smith. He has very sure hands.

jake206":3ojleioe said:

Whose better of the two? And who do you think will get C-Mike's spot? I know Rawls may be more explosive, but I like Smith. He has very sure hands.

Click to expand...

I don't know who's better. Rod Smith had open field infront of him, Rawls has a porous oline folding before the ball was in his hands :th2thumbs:

Maybe In the next preseason game assuming they both are still here we'll see how Smith is when facing the same collapsing oline.

Rawls fits the mold. Smith is an intriguing athlete who might make a good FB if he beefed up. Tough calls which are always nice.

Smith was playing against a prevent defense in a 2 minute offense. Smith's game was inflated by the situation, Rawls was just flat out impressive in a normal game situation and as good as Smith looked who found the endzone? Christine Michael's competition is Rawls!

peppersjap":xze4v5z7 said:

Smith was playing against a prevent defense in a 2 minute offense. Smith's game was inflated by the situation, Rawls was just flat out impressive in a normal game situation and as good as Smith looked who found the endzone? Christine Michael's competition is Rawls!

Click to expand...

This^^^

Rawls has the quickness that really suits the ZBS. He ran into a wall for most of the game because our OL wasn't doing ish right.

Rawls for sure.

I'm done with the C Mike experiment....it will just never pay off.

I thought both looked good. The biggest knock I had was on the 1 play Smith bounced outside and saw he wasn't getting anything and he just pulled up and jogged out of bounds for a 1 yd loss, like Russ might do. I know it's preseason, but you gotta push for that extra yardage.

Both were playing against scrubs in the prevent defense. Smith was the outlet screen dump-off for Archer on several plays and he made the most of it. Had some good pickups. Rawls touchdown, interestingly enough, came on a 3rd and ten from the 19 yard line.

If we can combine the two into one player it would be great, who wouldn't root for a Rod Rawls, Double R?

Well, game situations were different, but if I go by the standard for Seahawk RBs, I'd have to say that Rawls definitely looked more 'Beast-like' than Smith.

I'd go with Rawls... he fits the mold more and Smith is a bit too tall for what the Seahawks are looking for in a running back.

Pete went on a full explanation about this a few years back if anyone has that link.

Melencause":1263rih5 said:

I'd go with Rawls... he fits the mold more and Smith is a bit too tall for what the Seahawks are looking for in a running back.

Pete went on a full explanation about this a few years back if anyone has that link.

Click to expand...

Dickerson was a bit tall as well, Rams should have cut him

I think it comes down to toughness and competing every play no matter your size if you have the ability, Look at Forsett and what he did in Baltimore.

It's a toss up at this point. Both looked good. Thankfully we have three more preseason games to decipher this.

chris98251":14fj7mnl said:

Melencause":14fj7mnl said:

I'd go with Rawls... he fits the mold more and Smith is a bit too tall for what the Seahawks are looking for in a running back.

Pete went on a full explanation about this a few years back if anyone has that link.

Click to expand...

Dickerson was a bit tall as well, Rams should have cut him

Click to expand...

Rod Smith isn't Eric Dickerson.

Keep both along with Tukuafu and Coleman. Coleman can play that 3rd down role until the other guys can pass block.

Trade Turbin, Michael, and a 4th rounder for La'el Collins.

I've been watching film on Thomas Rawls and he Really reminds me of the way Lynch runs...He never runs out of bounds, he always turns back towards the post and drags as many guys upfield as far as he can..He shows a good lateral hop and a nice 0ne cut and go..He seems ready-made for the zone blocking system..I think he could be developed into a future plug and play back in the post Lynch era..Go on u-tube and check him out..He's a beast.. :0190l:

Neither is as good as cmike. This is a case of the staff trying to motivate via the media, fans then taking that coach speak seriously. Neither of them makes the team unless cmike is traded.

Neither is as good as cmike. This is a case of the staff trying to motivate via the media, fans then taking that coach speak seriously. Neither of them makes the team unless cmike is traded.

EverydayImRusselin":2qoparqy said:

I thought both looked good. The biggest knock I had was on the 1 play Smith bounced outside and saw he wasn't getting anything and he just pulled up and jogged out of bounds for a 1 yd loss, like Russ might do. I know it's preseason, but you gotta push for that extra yardage.

Click to expand...

I agree that was a strange decision by Smith, but I wonder if he did it to stop the clock because we were trailing by 2 scores and time in the game was running out. If he had gone for extra yardage he might have been tackled in bounds. It's hard to believe a 4th string RB trying to make the roster would just purposefully avoid contact.

I want to see if Rod Smith can do this against NFL competition.

[youtube]mVcGG2QF1eQ[/youtube]

Rawls isn't awful, but I think Smith provides a better contrast to Turbin and Rawls does. I don't think either one knocks off Michael, but theoretically speaking, I would choose Smith based on what I've seen so far. He's a low level NFL talent, but he has some traits that Turbin and Rawls are in short supply of.

ImTheScientist":16lpr8vv said:

Neither is as good as cmike. This is a case of the staff trying to motivate via the media, fans then taking that coach speak seriously. Neither of them makes the team unless cmike is traded.

Click to expand...

I see it that way too. Pete expressed long term views of Michael as recently as July. I think it is much more likely that Seattle would keep four halfbacks with Michael than keeping three without Michael.