Thoughts on Christine Michael??

I'm re-watching the game right now and am looking hard at the running backs / Christine Michael. He had a couple good runs in the first half, especially the one early in the 2nd quarter where he bulldozed a linebacker and got up and tried to keep running. That is the kind of running we need to see from him.

What is everyone's thought on Michael today? What about the other backs?? Like to hear people's thoughts.

My opinion of Michaels is that he has no patience / vision. He just sprints blindly through the hole and doesn't seem to have any strategy or cadence. One of Beast Modes best attributes is his ability to pause, move sideways and be patient for the running lane to develop. Michael seems to just sprint through the hole with no plan. Anyone else see this?? I think that's the main reason for his lack of success in the league thus far.

Coleman wasn't doing himself any favors in his early runs, and they basically yanked him once Cmike and Bryce Brown got hot.

Cmike had the best performance of the three, no question. Hopefully he has finally realized that this paycheck thing is nice, and he was on the verge of losing his.

Brown really helped himself with that longish run he busted late. Bumped up his YPC.

We had about 180 yards on the ground, about 40 of which were from Russell. So it's promising, but we'l need to see what they do against against the Rams.

I'll take 5.3 yds per carry and no fumbles all day, every day. I like that he hits the hole,quickly and avoids negative yard plays. It's hard to say if it was the Oline or Lynch slowing down but the run game was terrible early on this year


And I don't think you can average 5.3 ypc if you have "no vision"

Kid did great today! He took my advice to heart.

Seahawk Sailor":2gffwvlf said:

Two things for C-Mike:

1. Welcome back, kid! Hope you make it big here your second go 'round.

2. Watch the movie "Carrie". Hang onto the ball like she holds onto Tommy Ross during the prom dance.

Click to expand...

C-Mike had the game he needed to have. Ran hard and acted like he had done it before. He looked a lot more focused than in the past. If he keeps having days like today, that potential may finally be realized.

I kind of disagree. I think Michael's decisiveness helped him in this game. He didn't have any long runs, but he was incredibly consistent and was never caught in the backfield.

Interesting thoughts and opinions.

I don't necessarily disagree with anyone's thoughts. I am watching the 2nd half now and am seeing some big improvements from Mike. Still think he lacks vision when it comes to side-to-side movement. I'm still seeing him just sprint forward, I think that prevents him from busting out big yardage plays but I'll update this after I finish watching the entire game.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/evan_hill1/status/678828944364199936[/tweet]

I really hope this is real.

I always liked Michael here and he didn't necessarily lose his spot on the team, he was beaten out by Rawls for good reason. He did exactly what I hoped he would do today, an 84 yard day was exactly what we needed from him. I would like to see him be the main back next week and get a few more carries. A lot of credit has to be given to the offensive line though. We have been successful with Lynch, Rawls and now Michael this season.

jake206":jrp0hffw said:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/evan_hill1/status/678828944364199936[/tweet]

I really hope this is real.

Click to expand...

Me too! How awesome would it be next year to have Michael and Rawls competing for the starting position, with the second one getting a ton of backup reps? If Michael can produce how he was supposed to, and how Rawls was until he got injured, we could have a #1/#1 running back combo. On a run-first team, with the passing game what it is now, how scary would THAT be to game plan, especially when they'd have to go through our defense to outscore us?

We just played against a team that plays 8 in the box consistently and still finds a way to be really close to the bottom of the league in run defense. I like Michael, always have, but this performance was more of a first step in the right direction type deal than it was a "heyyy, maybe he's really good" kind of deal.

Tical21":1flnzvu4 said:

We just played against a team that plays 8 in the box consistently and still finds a way to be really close to the bottom of the league in run defense. I like Michael, always have, but this performance was more of a first step in the right direction type deal than it was a "heyyy, maybe he's really good" kind of deal.

Click to expand...

Well, can't argue that, but I'll take it for what it was, a back showing some stuff after just walking in the door.

If he can put up similar numbers next week, it'll go a long way to earning him an invite back to camp next season.

Sure, we'll see. Really all he needs to do is put up some semblance of a running game for us until Beast gets back.

The fact he was traded and cut I think was only part of it. It seems like he thought he was heir apparent to ML for three years. It was a given, then it wasn't. I think he saw what Rawls was doing and bet that really sunk in. Here was an undrafted rookie taking nothing for granted and basically was doing what Cmike was supposed to be doing and was successful. I'm sure after CM got cut he probably felt like he hit rock bottom, then, just like that, a chance at redemption and he wasn't going to blow this opportunity.

Tical21":w8zh8tme said:

We just played against a team that plays 8 in the box consistently and still finds a way to be really close to the bottom of the league in run defense. I like Michael, always have, but this performance was more of a first step in the right direction type deal than it was a "heyyy, maybe he's really good" kind of deal.

Click to expand...

Exactly what I saw. Promising first step in that he was doing a max of one cut than hitting the hole more often than not. As he gets more comfortable with that, I'm sure more of the later lateral, run-extending moves will happen, if he keeps grinding...big 'if' with him, so my fingers are crossed.

I'm pulling for the kid. He played with purpose today and it showed. Just keep your nose to the grind, hold on to the ball and run like you mean it.

seahawkfreak":2l0ltfet said:

The fact he was traded and cut I think was only part of it. It seems like he thought he was heir apparent to ML for three years. It was a given, then it wasn't. I think he saw what Rawls was doing and bet that really sunk in. Here was an undrafted rookie taking nothing for granted and basically was doing what Cmike was supposed to be doing and was successful. I'm sure after CM got cut he probably felt like he hit rock bottom, then, just like that, a chance at redemption and he wasn't going to blow this opportunity.

Click to expand...

That could have a whole lotta truth in it. I'm pulling for the guy. I didn't much think he had what it took in this league, but if he takes this to heart as a sort of "come-to-Jesus" moment, well, good on him. Nothing would make me happier than seeing him and Rawls battling it out for the #1 spot here next year--as long as it's on the level Rawls was performing at prior to injury.

I know Cleveland's D had awful rankings coming into this game, but they showed up to play I thought. Wilson found very few wide open receivers and was routinely forced by the defense to make tight throws. The run D got pushed around a bit but didn't miss many tackles. IIRC, Seattle only had one RB run in this game that went over 10 yards, which is impressive considering that both Brown and Michael are famous for creating explosive runs. There must have been at least a half-dozen runs in this game where it felt like Brown or Michael was very close to breaking one. If a gap had been a foot wider, or if a LB had missed an open-field tackle, etc.

There's a bit of a spectrum for RBs, between creating plays and taking plays. Prior to today, Michael was an extreme case of a guy who wanted to create plays, whereas Turbin was an extreme case of a guy who always wanted to take the easy yards even if they were few in number. The best RBs, like Lynch and Rawls, are a little of both and have a good feel for when to take what is given and when to gamble for more.

With regards to Brown, he seemed to be a competent back with plus physicality, like a poor man's version of what Darren McFadden has been giving Dallas this year. Brown tended to just hit the hole as quickly as possible and didn't show much feel, other than on his one big run. I thought Brown had a solid game, but I thought he ran like a guy who didn't want to get cut next week. Very conservative. To me, Brown's best run wasn't his big gainer, it was his 3 yard gain on 3rd and 2. Having the ability to threaten the run in short yardage will be big for his ability to stick to the roster.

Michael looks like a different back than he used to be, he seemed to be more of a taker against the Browns than he had been previously. Like Brown, he started the game running conservative. Very little dancing behind the line. He seemed to be running much more on assignment. That said, once past the 1st level Michael did show a bit of his aggressive side and started making extra moves to try and break free for a big gain. There were a few times he had me holding my breath for ball security reasons during those moments, but I also think the creativity and extra effort is what got Michael to a 5.25 YPC. As the game went on, Michael loosened up a bit and started feeling his runs more.

I think this RB competition will go three rounds. Today was round 1. The Rams round 2. The Cards round 3. I would say that Michael won round 1. But Brown still has two games left to make up ground.

kearly":j14s4o4u said:

IIRC, Seattle only had one RB run in this game that went over 10 yards, which is impressive considering that both Brown and Michael are famous for creating explosive runs. There must have been at least a half-dozen runs in this game where it felt like Brown or Michael was very close to breaking one. If a gap had been a foot wider, or if a LB had missed an open-field tackle, etc.

Click to expand...

Michael (10), Wilson (16), and Brown (18) all three had runs of at least ten yards in the run game. And Michael's 84 yards out of 182 net rushing yards in the game is pretty good, especially as he wasn't entirely the featured running back. Not counting Wilson, he accounted for 15 runs to the other backs' 16.

Seahawk Sailor":yxbvg53y said:

kearly":yxbvg53y said:

IIRC, Seattle only had one RB run in this game that went over 10 yards, which is impressive considering that both Brown and Michael are famous for creating explosive runs. There must have been at least a half-dozen runs in this game where it felt like Brown or Michael was very close to breaking one. If a gap had been a foot wider, or if a LB had missed an open-field tackle, etc.

Click to expand...

Michael (10), Wilson (16), and Brown (18) all three had runs of at least ten yards in the run game. And Michael's 84 yards out of 182 net rushing yards in the game is pretty good, especially as he wasn't entirely the featured running back. Not counting Wilson, he accounted for 15 runs to the other backs' 16.

Click to expand...

Moreover, Michael came in here and took a career high number of caries on a week's notice, and he didn't appear to make any serious mistakes. Wilson said after the game that he noticed an intensity and a focus in Michael that he hasn't seen from him before. I'm really excited to watch him continue to develop.

To me, Michael is just a placeholder until our real Running Backs come back; Lynch this season, and Rawls next season. Maybe he'll be a fine backup.