Mickey Spagnola on The Fan

[JoeKing]

weeden has to make plays for this team to win he has to make pass plays Atlanta will load up to stop the run so he has to pass them off of that

Atlanta has one of the weakest defenses versus the running game in the league. So why would we ignore that weakness and play to their strength? I say we run it down their throat until they choke to death. Weeden's margin of error needs to be kept to a minimum. I'm not saying never pass but Atlanta needs to prove they can stop the run before we abandon it.

 

[Common Sense]

If Michael has any of the ability that people are claiming, there's plenty of point to having him active over Whitehead.

Maybe there's your answer.

 

[Joe_Fan]

Mickey is fond of flipping questions back at those asking, so I'll give him a taste of his own medicine regarding his Christine Michael comment of "who would you sit?":

Who is so valuable that you couldn't sit them? Are any of the other running backs lighting it up so well that they couldn't be inactive? Are they so invaluable or untouchable? Not based on the early results.

And consider this, what have Lucky Whitehead's contributions been over these first two weeks? Would they miss those contributions vs a possible improvement from the running game?

What about Jeff Heath's contributions? If it makes the running game of a now quarterback-challenged team better, isn't it worth it?

If you're so hesitant to play this guy, maybe the real mistake was in trading for him at all?

Not only that but if you were to go with sitting Whitehead then you could technically use Dunbar as a WR, which is basically what we're doing anyways and that way we'd still technically be dressing 3 RBs.

 

[Stash]

Maybe there's your answer.

Could be. But if that's the case, why keep him at all?

 

[Stash]

Not only that but if you were to go with sitting Whitehead then you could technically use Dunbar as a WR, which is basically what we're doing anyways and that way we'd still technically be dressing 3 RBs.

Exactly! Dunbar should be listed as a receiver rather than a running back anyway.

 

[dallasdave]

Could be. But if that's the case, why keep him at all?

Stash great point !

 

[Common Sense]

Could be. But if that's the case, why keep him at all?

They can cut him at any time to recoup a draft pick.

 

[Stash]

They can cut him at any time to recoup a draft pick.

Yeah, I know. But if that's the case, why don't they do that now? It's not like they couldn't use the roster spot for help elsewhere.

 

[waving monkey]

That's the old JJ. He's been playing well the last 2 games.

Now Bat, thats the standard narrative for those who declared early he was a bust or no good.

 

[jazzcat22]

Now Bat, thats the standard narrative for those who declared early he was a bust or no good.

That's the norm from some about any player we have. And still ongoing with some new guys. As well as some players been here a year or two.

 

[lwehlers]

Mickey is fond of flipping questions back at those asking, so I'll give him a taste of his own medicine regarding his Christine Michael comment of "who would you sit?":

Who is so valuable that you couldn't sit them? Are any of the other running backs lighting it up so well that they couldn't be inactive? Are they so invaluable or untouchable? Not based on the early results.

And consider this, what have Lucky Whitehead's contributions been over these first two weeks? Would they miss those contributions vs a possible improvement from the running game?

What about Jeff Heath's contributions? If it makes the running game of a now quarterback-challenged team better, isn't it worth it?

If you're so hesitant to play this guy, maybe the real mistake was in trading for him at all?

see this is what makes me wonder also why did the front office trade for Michael. he needs to be active one game here soon. I also agree what has mcfaddon or randle done that makes them untouchable. if they both stink up this week then a change needs to be made.

 

[CowboyRoy]

That's the old JJ. He's been playing well the last 2 games.

Ouch!!! Burnt indeed. LOL

 

[DEMFAN]

I think the comittee is part of the problem!! Pick one back and roll with him like we did with Murray!

 

[Floatyworm]

I think the comittee is part of the problem!! Pick one back and roll with him like we did with Murray!

Easier said than done...I thought Randle actually ran out of gas. He sure didn't have the same spark in the 2nd half...making guys miss. Scary he only had 14 carries...and wasn't the same guy in the 2nd half.

 

[BAT]

Easier said than done...I thought Randle actually ran out of gas. He sure didn't have the same spark in the 2nd half...making guys miss. Scary he only had 14 carries...and wasn't the same guy in the 2nd half.

Different player when he's facing 8 in the box. You can't take a deer and expect it to run like a bull.

 

[DEMFAN]

Different player when he's facing 8 in the box. You can't take a deer and expect it to run like a bull.

I agree about the 8 in the box thing at that point we need to make a play in the passing game to pull them out of that look. That was not done though. I still think we should pick 1 back and roll with him. If he runs out of gas then move on to the next one who does not run out of gas! It all has to be clicking to be successful passing game and running game. One helps the other.

 

[Alexander]

I think the comittee is part of the problem!! Pick one back and roll with him like we did with Murray!

I did not like the alternating series thing after Randle had a very productive half. McFadden looked decent a couple of times but I really think we have a rhythm running game that is hard to juggle around .

 

[Doomsday101]

They have to bracket Jones. I think I put Mo on White and Carr on Jones and bracket him with a safety.

I would put Mo on him, but I think we need Carr's strength to jam Jones and then the safety to keep him from blowing right by Carr on the jam.

Then just hope Mo can keep White from having a big day. White is slowing down as he gets older. Hopefully what we've seen from Mo this season is true growth and not just the rest of the defense making his job easier to do. (though I want that too)

Hard to give safety help when the RB is eating your lunch for 141 and 3 TD.

 

[coult44]

Mickey is fond of flipping questions back at those asking, so I'll give him a taste of his own medicine regarding his Christine Michael comment of "who would you sit?":

Who is so valuable that you couldn't sit them? Are any of the other running backs lighting it up so well that they couldn't be inactive? Are they so invaluable or untouchable? Not based on the early results.

And consider this, what have Lucky Whitehead's contributions been over these first two weeks? Would they miss those contributions vs a possible improvement from the running game?

What about Jeff Heath's contributions? If it makes the running game of a now quarterback-challenged team better, isn't it worth it?

If you're so hesitant to play this guy, maybe the real mistake was in trading for him at all?

I could think of 7-10 guys i would sit so that CM could get a chance. Hell, I might add a couple more to that if we include Randle and/or McFadden. It's not like he would do any worse than those guys are doing. Regardless of what excuse they can come up with, both of them aren't putting up the numbers we need.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Hard to give safety help when the RB is eating your lunch for 141 and 3 TD.

That's what happens when four of your best DL aren't playing. You chalk it up to circumstance and move on to the next week.