Norton Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 What are your thoughts on Thomas Rawls and Alfred Blue? Do you see them moving in to the starting roles or is there another threat there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 (edited) Maybe starters in name, but both will be rotational guys. Edited January 20, 2016 by rajncajn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Maybe starters in name, but both will be rotational guys. I don't know about that. Rawls looked "beast"-ly in a good number of spans this year. Who is going to really eat into his carries if Lynch is gone? F-Jax? Dude's like 50 and a COP back at best. Michael? Let's not open up that can o' worms. Blue, I can see. Grimes and Polk are able bodies. They'll probably draft someone too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorningMud Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 Rawls will be. Blue won't. Between the draft and strong FA class, Houston will upgrade. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flemingd Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 I wouldn't be so sure Rawls gets by scot free. He's not an elite talent, they could easily bring someone in in the middle rounds or FA like Forte that takes a big chunk out of Rawls. This is a team that's only worried about winning, and they aren't about to go into the season with Rawls, Michael, and FJax at the position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorningMud Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 I wouldn't be so sure Rawls gets by scot free. He's not an elite talent, they could easily bring someone in in the middle rounds or FA like Forte that takes a big chunk out of Rawls. This is a team that's only worried about winning, and they aren't about to go into the season with Rawls, Michael, and FJax at the position. I don't see them investing a ton of money in the position when they have a guy who proved capable of getting it done very cheaply for them. They have other areas on the team they need to put money into (the OL for example). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilthorp Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 UDFA RB is a nice story but he passed the eye test. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Brown Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 I wouldn't be so sure Rawls gets by scot free. He's not an elite talent, I'm not a combine/scouting report junkie. But I was under the impression he had good physical measurables, but wasn't drafted due to character issues. If seems rather apparent he isn't a plodder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolphin_Akie Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 Rawls will be. Blue won't. Between the draft and strong FA class, Houston will upgrade. I agree with this. Rawls is likely to be given the best chance to succeed if Seattle cuts ties with Lynch as he's really cheap and shown he can be the lead back. I think Blue ends up as part of a rotation if Arian Foster, they'll find a bigger back to pair him with through the draft of FA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montana is da Man Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 Rawls has the better chance to be a starter and produce. He proved capable in limited showings this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 I just don't see Seattle putting all their eggs in Rawls' basket as they did with Lynch in that offense. Just too much riding on the health of one player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isleseeya Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 I don't see them investing a ton of money in the position when they have a guy who proved capable of getting it done very cheaply for them. They have other areas on the team they need to put money into (the OL for example). I agree with this . I think Rawls will get vast majority of the work as long as he is healthy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isleseeya Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 how abut David Johnson of Cardinals ?? starter , 3 down back , or rotation guy that shares work ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Brown Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 I just don't see Seattle putting all their eggs in Rawls' basket as they did with Lynch in that offense. Just too much riding on the health of one player. It's Wilson's offense now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 I just don't see Seattle putting all their eggs in Rawls' basket as they did with Lynch in that offense. Just too much riding on the health of one player. They will bring in some depth/competition, but they won't spend much draft capital or salary cap to do it. I'd guess a 5th round pick at most, but more likely an UDFA or a minimum salary veteran after the season starts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilthorp Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 It's Wilson's offense now. But Wilson's offense isn't just Wilson's offense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelredd9 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 I want no part of Alfred Blue. Thomas Rawls is the kind of guy to draft in rounds 5 through 8 and hope for the best. It's impossible to predict if he'll be a full-time running back. His 5.6 yards-per-carry this year is nice, though. I'll wait until round 6 or 7 to draft him since he might fall that far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 I want no part of Alfred Blue. Thomas Rawls is the kind of guy to draft in rounds 5 through 8 and hope for the best. It's impossible to predict if he'll be a full-time running back. His 5.6 yards-per-carry this year is nice, though. I'll wait until round 6 or 7 to draft him since he might fall that far. Agree on Blue. We won't know Rawls draft cost for a while. If he is looking like the clear starter in late August, people will reach for him as early as the 2nd. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkraft896 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Alfred Blue is just a better version of Christine Michael. Every year we hear the hype and every year he is pretty disappointing. Granted, not to the level of Michael, but he is still never as good as we are told he is supposed to be. I hate having guys like that on my team because I always get tempted to start them and get burned. Then, I never start them on the few weeks that they actually do good. In my opinion, Rawls will be given a lot of the work at least early in the season. If he does well, he secures the job, but if he falters a bit I expect the Seahawks to go to more of committee. I would draft him around round 3 or 4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.