Carroll indicates C-Mike will make the 53

[tweet]https://twitter.com/CHawk_Talk/status/635897957351424000[/tweet]
Now, this could mean that both Rawls and Smith are ahead of Michael in the depth chart and will make the team regardless over him, but I find that unlikely. Now that this has come to light, I believe that we will only keep 3 RB's (Lynch, Turbin, Michael). I hope that we keep both FB's (Tukuafu, Coleman). Tukuafu can serve as emergency depth on the D-Line, and has also reportedly been taking reps in the TE position in certain packages. Coleman had snaps at RB last year and from what I remember he would be perfectly fine in the back-up RB role, probably better than either Rod Smith or Rawls at this point. Either could play FB as the other fills in at whatever position is in need, allowing the team greater flexibility with fewer roster spots taken up.

I think of it more as Pete saying - cutdown isn't for another week right now they are competing with themselves to be the best they can be and then in a week cut-downs will happen and I am not going to tell you how that goes..

To be fair to Rawls and Smith, they've had to deal with a very inexperienced OL blocking for them. That being said, I don't think either has flashed enough this preseason to really threaten Michael, who's had his ups and downs. Still two games to go, but if I'm deciding now, Lynch, Turbin and Michael are your final RBs. Of course, either Rawls or Smith could really go off and put that into question.

The good thing about them not going off this preseason is that they should be easily available for the Practice Squad and can keep working in the system.

DavidSeven":2avsqqz4 said:

To be fair to Rawls and Smith, they've had to deal with a very inexperienced OL blocking for them. That being said, I don't think either has flashed enough this preseason to really threaten Michael, who's had his ups and downs. Still two games to go, but if I'm deciding now, Lynch, Turbin and Michael are your final RBs. Of course, either Rawls or Smith could really go off and put that into question.

The good thing about them not going off this preseason is that they should be easily available for the Practice Squad and can keep working in the system.

Click to expand...

Speaking of OL blocking and its effect on how a back looks:

DAVIS HSU ‏@DavisHsuSeattle 2h2 hours ago
Carroll says 2nd group OL went the wrong way a few times, <snip>

I'm more down on Rawls for his wide open drops than his actual runs. Coleman is 10x better reciever.

yeah i wouldn't read anything into this tweet. no decisions have been made yet and Mr. Always Compete wouldn't let on if any had been made....

DavidSeven hits the nail on the head. Even if the team did like Rawls or Smith slightly more than Michael, they could probably stash one of them on the PS this season whereas Michael would get claimed off waivers in a nanosecond.

Turbin is a free agent next year and Lynch is always a threat to retire. It wouldn't make much sense to ditch Michael at this point unless they were extremely down on him, but I don't get that sense.

kearly":2co4efj5 said:

DavidSeven hits the nail on the head. Even if the team did like Rawls or Smith slightly more than Michael, they could probably stash one of them on the PS this season whereas Michael would get claimed off waivers in a nanosecond.

Turbin is a free agent next year and Lynch is always a threat to retire. It wouldn't make much sense to ditch Michael at this point unless they were extremely down on him, but I don't get that sense.

Click to expand...

Ditto. Especially since Michael is showing noticable improvement in blocking. I've always felt he leaned on his natural ability and didn't work to round out his game, but he's starting to prove that wrong.

I don't find that quote by PC to be in any way indicative of anything regarding Christine Michael.

NorthDallas40oz":zwz0lynh said:

I don't find that quote by PC to be in any way indicative of anything regarding Christine Michael.

Click to expand...

+1

I'm not convinced Christine makes the final roster. The rest of what he does isn't going to matter if he can't hang on to the ball.

Yeah, as Mikeak said, that was Pete-speak, nothing to do with who will and won't be kept.
I appreciated the other thoughtful posts in this thread, so glad it got started.
It's been a pleasant surprise to see C-Mike lay out at least a couple attention-getting blocks in pass-pro this preseason.
That's a couple more of those blocks from him than I can remember ever in the past.

olyfan63":3bksss82 said:

Yeah, as Mikeak said, that was Pete-speak, nothing to do with who will and won't be kept.
I appreciated the other thoughtful posts in this thread, so glad it got started.
It's been a pleasant surprise to see C-Mike lay out at least a couple attention-getting blocks in pass-pro this preseason.
That's a couple more of those blocks from him than I can remember ever in the past.

Click to expand...

I'm as happy to see him pass blocking as the next guy but every time he runs the ball it feels like I am channeling Blitzer88.

NorthDallas40oz":3tyl5bh4 said:

I don't find that quote by PC to be in any way indicative of anything regarding Christine Michael.

Click to expand...

The full quote is much more revealing:
[tweet]https://twitter.com/gbellseattle/status/635911507025354753[/tweet]

History has shown that when Pete talks you up in pre season it's dangerous to buy that jersey number.

Plus indicating any different would kill any trade value he might have.

It might be a small hint towards Michael being the favorite to win the 3rd HB spot but a lot of assumptions are made from Pete's very vague statement. I wouldn't take too mcuh from this.

There was never any chance of Michael getting cut. He's too talented to give up on especially with possibly one year left with Lynch. Turbin, Rawls, Smith all look good at times but I don't think the staff views any of them as a Lynch replacement. Michael is the only one with that type of potential. It's cheap to keep him one more year to see if he improves and his payoff is huge, why would you give up on that? I never understood the cut talk with him.

SomersetHawk":qjh8g75k said:

Plus indicating any different would kill any trade value he might have.

Click to expand...

This ^^^

I think this comment from Pete was multiple things. I think it was an attempt to salvage any trade value from whoever might come calling, or keep it from falling further. I also think it was a bit of a way to light a fire and to see if Rawls/Smith can play with even more of that chip on their shoulders during practice, getting them to push just a little bit harder. Finally I think Pete is also trying to cool down some of the attention on them (especially Rawls) so they can try to stash one or both of them on the PS.

I think with C-Mike they might be more focused on instilling confidence in him, not necessarily constantly reminding him that it's "always compete" and saying "he could get cut for the next guy" in the press conference. It goes a little against the always compete mantra, but maybe they know C-Mike handles pressure differently and they want to see how he runs when the pressure is off a little and its been indicated he will make the team. Just a thought, might not be the case. Also the trade value points you all have made are very possible as well.

FYI - Some screen shots of Michael in pass pro with breakdowns from the KC game (his stuff starts at #6):

http://www.fieldgulls.com/2015/8/22/919 ... stin-britt