All-22 Christine Michael

[Nightman]

Maybe, but if he actually had value in the Bell/Lacy Range he wouldn't be had for 7th round pick. Those teams knew about those players from the get go. Two years later the Seahawks saw fit to salvage a 7th for the guy. He's role player that was worthy of a few "relief" carries. In contrast, the Cowboys could probably get the same value in a trade for a player (Randle) that was drafted a full three rounds later.

If Carrol has proven anything it's that he's a pretty decent guy at getting the most out of his talent. I don't think the Seahawks are even in the top 5 of the league in talent (especially offensively) yet he's been to 2 Super Bowls in a row.

I'll wish the kid the best but the "cult of Michael" is a lot more about hope than actual production. We ALL hope the kid is good but that's all it is. Hope.

It is clearly about potential. He just seems like a perfect fit for this RBBC.

 

[visionary]

Has anyone studied Michael in the NFL?

There is now a Cult of Michael and I'm curious what is the driving force behind it. I don't think it is all Texas A&M fans, but it's possible.

In the All-22 you can do a search for team, year, play type and player. I did a search to see all of Michael's runs from 2014 and I also watched his 2015 preseason runs.

Keep in mind the sample size is fairly small with only 34 carries in 2014 and 32 in the 2014 preseason.

For a player that was basically free (conditional 7th) he looks reasonably good; however, he has a similar running style to Joseph Randle. They are both what I call jump-cut runners. When watching Michael, it looked like Joseph Randle gained 10 pounds, changed numbers and played for Seattle. Michael is probably a little faster but not by a huge amount. He does not have McFadden type speed on the football field.

Much like the Cowboys current runners, if the play is blocked he'll gain yards and if it's not he probably won't. Yes, he's a little more powerful than Randle but it's not an extreme difference. He does not move the pile like Marshawn Lynch or something similar to that style.

He might be a little better in terms of going to the far outside on runs than Randle but I don't see a huge difference.

He might be a better short yardage option than Randle/McFadden but he's not Marion Barber in his prime in terms of powering through people.

On one of his very best runs, he fumbled at the end.

He did not look as good in the 2015 preseason as he did in 2014.

If he is able to outperform Randle in Dallas, it will come down to vision and decision making more than a difference in physical ability. Michael and Randle both have the required physical ability but the one that makes the best decisions is the one that will likely succeed.

Overall, Michael's 2014 season was very similar to Randle's game against Atlanta. He had some big plays and then he had a lot of minimal or no gain plays with a few intermediate gains mixed in.

I did not watch him in pass blocking. There is no way to do a search on that.

When one starts with s conclusion, it is surprising how often the research supports it

 

[Zman5]

I assume that you read in sequential order. My post (#27) has the combine number for Randle.

Yeh but why did you then post his pro day numbers and combine numbers for others after that post?

Why even post his pro day numbers when comparing the RBs?

Pro day numbers are always made to look better and unless you are comparing two athletes who did their workouts on the same enviroment, the stats are useless when compariing two players.

 

[skinsscalper]

It is clearly about potential. He just seems like a perfect fit for this RBBC.

Ryan Leaf had potential. It seems he's a Joseph Randle clone, actually. Time will tell.

 

[starfrombirth]

yeah, he doesn't really jump off the film. do think he'll be a better short yardage runner than randle. just not mb3 or murray.

maybe a lagarette blount

I'd take Blount in a second

 

[starfrombirth]

Exactly. It's obvious he wants to make Randle look better and CMike worse.

That's never really been xwalkers modus operandi before. I don't think he's pushing an agenda. I think he's just trying to temper people's expectations with real data. Everyone knows that 40 times vary from day to day and combine to pro-day. That's not in dispute. It's just that people act like CMike is so much faster than Randle and the truth is that he really isn't. What is important to note, however, is that CMike is 20 lbs heavier than Randle and still slightly faster thus generating more kinetic energy at the point of impact! That can mean the difference between breaking a tackle for 20 yards and stuffed at the line.

 

[Zman5]

Most people don't respond to loaded questions. You sound like Rogah.

You presume people are just uneducated fan boys that can't possibly have the inside info you have with the All 22 film of all 50 of his carries. Some people followed him at TAM, some researched him at the draft and others have seen his potential when mentioned as a possible Cowboy.

Don't always take these "couch scout" All-22 info for gospel either. Not saying this thread is one but I've seen some of these type of threads with info that is completely taken out of contex when I went back and watch the All-22 myself.

As always its best to do the research yourself and form your own opinion.

 

[Zman5]

That's never really been xwalkers modus operandi before. I don't think he's pushing an agenda. I think he's just trying to temper people's expectations with real data. Everyone knows that 40 times vary from day to day and combine to pro-day. That's not in dispute. It's just that people act like CMike is so much faster than Randle and the truth is that he really isn't. What is important to note, however, is that CMike is 20 lbs heavier than Randle and still slightly faster thus generating more kinetic energy at the point of impact! That can mean the difference between breaking a tackle for 20 yards and stuffed at the line.

I guess you missed all the pro Parnell and anti Free posts/threads by XWalker.

Anyways, I agree the underwear olympics numbers are mostly useless but if you are going to post them for several players, at least be fair and post the numbers from the same event.

 

[starfrombirth]

I guess you missed all the Parnell posts/threads by XWalker.

Anyways, I agree the underwear olympics numbers are mostly useless but if you are going to post them for several players, at least be fair and post the numbers from the same event.

To be fair.... I agree with x on that point. I do think Parnell is better than free.. but that's another thread.

 

[Zman5]

To be fair.... I agree with x on that point. I do think Parnell is better than free.. but that's another thread.

Whether he is right or wrong, my point was he does/did push his agenda.

 

[Derinyar]

I think it comes down to this statement. Right now the running game isn't dominating like it did last year and people are antsy for that to change. Randle has been pretty good to this point, but because he's gotten bottled up some and made some bad decisions also some people are ready to move on. DMC hasn't had a ton of carries yet, I think mostly because Dunbar has basically taken the 3rd down back role. Michael has even less known about him then Randle at this point, so that makes some people hopefully, combined with some memories of him being good in college 3 years ago. Who knows if Michael will be good or not in our system, none of us is my bet. If the coaches thought they had something special on their hands I suspect they would have already been getting him game snaps. If we do activate him I'd be very interested to see how he is used, and even more interested to see what sort of roster gyrations we use to get him active.

 

[AsthmaField]

What Michael has that is special is his explosion, lateral agility, change of direction, and his strength.

Comparing their combine/pro day numbers doesn't tell the whole story because Randle didn't bench nor did he do most of the agility drills.

I'm not saying C-Mike is a better or worse RB than Randle... just that Christine has some special physical qualities that Randle doesn't possess.

To this point I have been less than impressed with what Michael has done in the NFL (or in college for that matter)... but he does have a whole boatload of physical talent. Watching him in the preseason of his rookie year he was incredibly explosive. I remember watching the entire Seattle game and after Lynch got some carries, they put Turbin in. Then, they put C-Mike in and I said right there that he was going to be a star. He looked so much quicker than Lynch and Turbin. It just jumped out at me. I hadn't really paid a lot of attention to him up to that point, but wow, did he leave an impression on me.

I have been waiting to hear that he broke out since then.

Which goes to what I'm not crazy about with Michael: He just hasn't done it. At TAMU he didn't play like he should have and at Seattle he didn't either. He seems to be missing something and I'm not sure what it is.

Is it poor run instincts? Poor vision? Poor work ethic? Can't follow a blocking scheme?

I don't know.

Maybe what he has lacked is an opportunity to be the guy but I don't think so.

Perhaps whatever he's been missing is correctable and a chance of scenery and coaching is what he needs. Maybe this OL can spring him. Maybe it can't.

Nobody knows.

I'm going to hold out hope that the light goes on for him in Dallas... because if it does, the guy is really going to be something to watch in this offense. It could be huge.

I'm not expecting it but I'm hoping for it. For what Dallas paid for him, it was easily a terrific move.

Maybe lighting will strike for Dallas. I hope so.

 

[burmafrd]

lots of players have potential. Not that many actually produce. Xwalker was making the point that so far in the NFL cmike has NOT produced. So why is it that some here are claiming all we have to do is give him the ball and stand back?

 

[kevm3]

How can he produce if he's never on the field? We need to let him play. If he sucks, roll the rest of the way with our current guys and draft an RB next year.

 

[Kaiser]

To be fair.... I agree with x on that point. I do think Parnell is better than free.. but that's another thread.

Also posters should (but won't) credit X with calling it on Parnell from the start. He said early on Parnell would improve and be a solid starter. The chorus on this forum went from "Parnell sucks" to "Parnell is inconsistent" to "At least we didn't overpay Parnell with that 32 Million dollar contract".

 

[Nightman]

What Michael has that is special is his explosion, lateral agility, change of direction, and his strength.

Comparing their combine/pro day numbers doesn't tell the whole story because Randle didn't bench nor did he do most of the agility drills.

I'm not saying C-Mike is a better or worse RB than Randle... just that Christine has some special physical qualities that Randle doesn't possess.

To this point I have been less than impressed with what Michael has done in the NFL (or in college for that matter)... but he does have a whole boatload of physical talent. Watching him in the preseason of his rookie year he was incredibly explosive. I remember watching the entire Seattle game and after Lynch got some carries, they put Turbin in. Then, they put C-Mike in and I said right there that he was going to be a star. He looked so much quicker than Lynch and Turbin. It just jumped out at me. I hadn't really paid a lot of attention to him up to that point, but wow, did he leave an impression on me.

I have been waiting to hear that he broke out since then.

Which goes to what I'm not crazy about with Michael: He just hasn't done it. At TAMU he didn't play like he should have and at Seattle he didn't either. He seems to be missing something and I'm not sure what it is.

Is it poor run instincts? Poor vision? Poor work ethic? Can't follow a blocking scheme?

I don't know.

Maybe what he has lacked is an opportunity to be the guy but I don't think so.

Perhaps whatever he's been missing is correctable and a chance of scenery and coaching is what he needs. Maybe this OL can spring him. Maybe it can't.

Nobody knows.

I'm going to hold out hope that the light goes on for him in Dallas... because if it does, the guy is really going to be something to watch in this offense. It could be huge.

I'm not expecting it but I'm hoping for it. For what Dallas paid for him, it was easily a terrific move.

Maybe lighting will strike for Dallas. I hope so.

A lot of fans think jobs are won or lost at practice without any salary or personal politics. There just isn't enough time to get the rookie 3rd team back any carries with the first team. They weren't moving off Lynch and already drafted Turbin in 2012 so Michael is lost in the shuffle. It happens on every team.

Let's hope DAL reaps the benefits this time of another team's roster squeeze.

 

[jrumann59]

He was drafted in the same class and tier with Eddie Lacy and Leveon Bell.

Any Cowboy fan would love to have 2 years from either of them.

Michael was completely blocked by Lynch in SEA, time to see if he can be as good as his draft stock.

If you can't have expectations and hope for a guy like him you might as well hang em up as far as being a glass half filled fan.

He may have been blocked to be a starter, but he was blocked from being the 2nd back used on gameday. This year the nd position was his for the taking but Seattle decides to get Old Man Jackson and go with Rawls over Michael at the #3 RB.

 

[darthseinfeld]

OMG, folks! CMike is not all that. In Seattle he lost the backup RB job to a rookie. Why do folks think this 3rd string RB can do anything at all. He was crap in Seattle and he is crap in Dallas. I pray we never get desperate enough to allow him on the field.

Did you see what the Seahawks 3rd stringer did last week?

 

[darthseinfeld]

We have a Cult of Michael, a Cult of Randle and Cult of McFadden.

 

[xwalker]

Yeh but why did you then post his pro day numbers and combine numbers for others after that post?

Why even post his pro day numbers when comparing the RBs?

Pro day numbers are always made to look better and unless you are comparing two athletes who did their workouts on the same enviroment, the stats are useless when compariing two players.

I normally post the best numbers for players.

They don't cheat at Pro Days. There have been players with worse numbers at their Pro Days than at the combine. The numbers are normally better because the Pro Days are after the combine and the players that didn't run well at the combine train to get better an usually do get better.

My point in the first place is that combine type measurable(s) are not a good method to judge a RBs. McFadden can out run most RBs but that has not made him great. Emmitt ran a 4.6 forty.