Gooselin, Fisher say C Michael time may be close

Question: Do you anticipate any shakeup to the Cowboys RB rotation with the way the second half went against the Falcons?

Gosselin: I would expect to see Christine Michael very soon. The Cowboys needed a pounder between the tackles last weekend and that back isn't in the current stable of Randle, McFadden and Dunbar. They are all edge guys. Michael offers the Cowboys a chance to run between the tackles. That was DeMarco Murray's bread & butter last season. If the Cowboys can't run the ball better than they did in the second half against the Falcons, every quarterback the Cowboys trot out there will have problems -- including Tony Romo. The Cowboys need to find out what they have in Michael and they need to find out soon.

Keep reading...

mike fisher ✭ ‎@fishsports

#Cowboys Wed practice will be a very competitive one, I think. Johnny Rod on Twitter: "@fishsports chances of Christine getting pt soon?" …

It's only logical. I don't think anyone is deeming him a savior. Gotta at least kick the tires and see what the hell we have there.

Good. Just let him hammer it behind our OL.

Sturm had a great breakdown of the O-line in the second half. The problem wasn’t with the running backs, it was with how poor the O-line played. I think the running backs are fine and until one of them gets hurt i don’t know how you can get make Michael active. It’s not even a speed bump to fans that you can’t dress 4 running backs. If you did you are hurting yourself somewhere else. Or you bench McFadden, who has done a fine job this season. It’s not like he is leaving yards on the field.

I don't have any doubt he'd help running the ball, I think the the concern is knowing pass protections.

But Romo is already hurt, and who cares as much if he gets Weeden killed.

And as messed up as it sounds, I have a feeling the brain trust doesn't know which RB they'd bench to play him. Even with those long runs Randle made, I wasn't impressed with him. Freeman looked 10x better than anyone we had.

Isn't it logical to bench McFadden? At least Randall can play special teams. Dunbar is actually good so gotta ride that out.

ThoughtExperiment said:

I don't have any doubt he'd help running the ball, I think the the concern is knowing pass protections.

But Romo is already hurt, and who cares as much if he gets Weeden killed.

And as messed up as it sounds, I have a feeling the brain trust doesn't know which RB they'd bench to play him. Even with those long runs Randle made, I wasn't impressed with him. Freeman looked 10x better than anyone we had.

Keep reading...

Randle looked great so did McFadden and Dunbar. Freeman isn’t anything special. 10x better? Talk about being dramatic.

Randle was "great" but Freeman was "nothing special"?

UVA -- I don't know, I think Jerry loves McFadden too much to bench him. I just can't see it happening, not that it would hurt anything if they did. I'm so underwhelmed by both backs.

COWBOYS RUEL!!!!!1111

Right Everlasting?

Everlastingxxx said:

Sturm had a great breakdown of the O-line in the second half. The problem wasn’t with the running backs, it was with how poor the O-line played. I think the running backs are fine and until one of them gets hurt i don’t know how you can get make Michael active. It’s not even a speed bump to fans that you can’t dress 4 running backs. If you did you are hurting yourself somewhere else. Or you bench McFadden, who has done a fine job this season. It’s not like he is leaving yards on the field.

Keep reading...

Until they start being consistent, I would hold off on the anointing oil.

Holy fuck really? Dude is such a troll.

hmm I have cmd on ignore.

Bob Sacamano said:

Until they start being consistent, I would hold off on the anointing oil.

Keep reading...

They spilled the whole bottle all over those guys last year, as usual one good year and next thing you know everyone is destined for the hall of fame. I'm sure they're pretty good but man I get tired of how our players get hyped up.

I don't think the difference between bad to good to best is all that great. Chalk up an injury or two, lose a good RB who punishes the D, lose the line coach and add in that teams have probably studied their weaknesses in the offseason and are fired up to shut up the "greatest line in the league" and its not surprising the performance has dropped off. Hell, IIRC, the fucking Patriots are starting 3 rookies on their line and they're blowing teams out

Good thing about our line is they seem like humble, hard working guys and I hope that will pay off

There is always the log out forever option....

ThoughtExperiment said:

And as messed up as it sounds, I have a feeling the brain trust doesn't know which RB they'd bench to play him. Even with those long runs Randle made, I wasn't impressed with him. Freeman looked 10x better than anyone we had.

Keep reading...

Yeah its tough to warrant FOUR RB's all being active when only one of them (Dunbar) does anything on special teams. You'd have to bench one for sure you'd think.

Randle had a few nice runs and has played ok, but he has also done too much dancing around trying to go left and right instead of being decisive and taking what he can get. Some of the zero and negative yd gains he had should have been 2 or 3 yd gains. Maybe some of that is experience or can be coached, but the bad plays are handicapping the offense. (especially w/o Romo) Despite what Sturm supposedly said about the OL in the 2nd half, a couple of the bad runs were on Randle. It was also his fault they didn't convert the 3rd and 1 he got stuffed on early in the game.

cmd34 said:

There is always the log out forever option....

Keep reading...

I've been suggesting that to you and your buttboy Mid for quite some time

dbair1967 said:

Yeah its tough to warrant FOUR RB's all being active when only one of them (Dunbar) does anything on special teams. You'd have to bench one for sure you'd think.

Randle had a few nice runs and has played ok, but he has also done too much dancing around trying to go left and right instead of being decisive and taking what he can get. Some of the zero and negative yd gains he had should have been 2 or 3 yd gains. Maybe some of that is experience or can be coached, but the bad plays are handicapping the offense. (especially w/o Romo) Despite what Sturm supposedly said about the OL in the 2nd half, a couple of the bad runs were on Randle. It was also his fault they didn't convert the 3rd and 1 he got stuffed on early in the game.

Keep reading...

Because of the way Michael is built with the low center of gravity, his very quick feet (4.02/20ydshuttle and 6.69/3cone) for being 220lbs, he might get better results than Randle at least in those congested gaps. Randle does do everything he can to fall forward but he's not anywhere near the sledgehammer that Murray was or that is required to take 2.4 yards and make them 5. He also runs straight up like a javelin thrower, whereas Michael runs lower and with more power. Garnet was disappointed with Randle not breaking more tackles in the Giant game and although he did appear to break some tackles in the Falcon game, the Falcons got to him early and were sloppy in the first half. Durant said they adjusted in the second half with better tackling. Michaels quickness may get him into space faster than Randle.

Not sure they really have to worry about whether to carry 4 RBs. Dunbar is basically a WR getting reps left vacant by Dezs injury, Escobars lack of use, and Streets/Williams being mannequins. Randle should be used what he was drafted for anyway (108 recs in college) and let him be the 3rd down back to block and dump off. McFadden and Michael would be more of the true RBs (and that's only 2).

Omegasupreme said:

Randle should be used what he was drafted for anyway (108 recs in college) and let him be the 3rd down back to block and dump off. McFadden and Michael would be more of the true RBs (and that's only 2).

Keep reading...

Totally agree. Use him like he was used in college, which is as a spread RB and pass catcher. He never played in anything resembling a power run offense in college and it makes sense he wouldn't be good at that because he isn't built for it.

It's not like Michael would have made a bunch of yards where Randle didn't the other day -- in the second half the RBs really didn't have a chance. But I do wish we had someone who could at least deliver a blow to the defender and bring a little physical element, which nobody now can.