HawkShack.com

We’re still a run first team.
We're still committed to stopping the run.
We're still committed to being the most physically imposing (bully) team in the league.
This draft was clearly all about those things.

We addressed essentially every pressing need.
We'll never have to scramble for running back help should we get injuries there, and we can now say goodbye to the headcase Christine Michael. If ever there was a sign that a guy isn't wanted it's when a team trades them away, then picks them back up out of desperation, and then after the player has a decent performance, in the following years draft, the team drafts THREE players to replace him. Say buh bye.

We wanted O-line help, then many of us complained about the help they brought in, somehow thinking that we know better than they do, which players best fit our system. It's pretty ridiculous to complain about a guy (Odhiambo) who everyone and their dog knew that our coaching staff was head over heels in love with, just because we THINK that there may have been better players available.
It's just as silly to complain about a guy (Ifedi) who will lock down RT for at least the length of his rookie deal, and who is a mountain of a man, strong as the day is long, and who our O-Line coach is completely convinced he can coach up to greatness.

I think that both guys we got to help on the D-Line will be STUDS! Especially Jarran Reed who I see holding down Mebane's old spot, as though Mebane had never left. The fact we got him in the second round, is not only a tribute to just how deep this DT class really was, it's also SHOCKING. It might be the steal of the draft, and is certainly one of them.

Adding a TE who was considered by many to be the drafts best all around TE, someone who resembles Zack Miller in many ways, (though he's faster), is a terrific move, especially considering the injury to Graham, his inability to block, and the fact that Willson will be a free agent next year. This move is possibly the most intriguing of all of them. Fascinating move. I absolutely love it.

As far as I am concerned, just getting Ifedi, Reed, Vannett, and CJ Prosise (who will be a nice weapon on third downs at worst), plus a couple of guys (Odhiambo and Hunt) to compete on the O-line, and who could possibly both play next year, makes this a great draft to me.
Everything else was just gravy.

Overall, I'm happy the way our draft went.

I'm a bit puzzled by our first 3rd round selection (Prosise), and very surprised that we drafted 3 RB's overall. Definitely a need, but didn't see us dedicating that many choices to the position. I think Michael still has a legit shot at staying, but will need a solid TC and preseason to ensure it. Not a big fan by any means, but he knows the system and has to realize his days in the league are numbered if he fails this year.

I would've liked to draft a CB somewhere in the 3rd.

The focus on RB's and the TE we selected are clearly insurance towards Rawls and Graham.

Glad we picked up a center along the way, and Jefferson, Collins, and Lawler sound promising for being late picks.

Gonna need our 2 OL rooks to get with the program pretty quick.

I'm also encouraged by the "C" grade we've received from PFF. I know they're a reputable site, but our recent drafts have graded out higher after a couple of years have passed.

Zorn76 wrote:I'm a bit puzzled by our first 3rd round selection (Prosise), and very surprised that we drafted 3 RB's overall. Definitely a need, but didn't see us dedicating that many choices to the position. I think Michael still has a legit shot at staying, but will need a solid TC and preseason to ensure it.
I would've liked to draft a CB somewhere in the 3rd.


The focus on RB's and the TE we selected are clearly insurance towards Rawls and Graham.


I'm also encouraged by the "C" grade we've received from PFF. I know they're a reputable site, but our recent drafts have graded out higher after a couple of years have passed.

Please allow me to comment and respectfully disagree just a little specifically with the first two parts I left quoted and expand on something that is bothering me about the past part I left quoted.

First, I never thought Michaels would still be with the team at this point. I give him almost zero chance to remain. I don't think he has ANY realistic chance at all, and I'll be shocked if he does. Clearly they've soured on him, and if trading him away, and then drafting three RB's doesn't say that, then nothing does.
Here's the thing about all those RB's that people are missing though. COMPETITION! At USC Pete Carroll ALWAYS had tons of 5 star RB's running around trying out to make the squad. That's because he sees RB's in very different roles. He likes the powerful bell cow back who can grind defenses to death, AND he likes the versatile, quick third down/change of pace RB as well. After Lynch's retirement, and having ONLY Michaels, a guy they are clearly soured on as Rawls depth, they HAD to take a bunch of RB's.
Something about Zac Brown the Seahawks have liked all along, he was an official VMAC visit. I really am not quite sure what it is they like, but I know they like having competition.
With Collins, he's a guy who looks remarkably like a player Pete had here last season until he was cut. In fact, he is everything some people wanted Derrick Henry to be, only he can actually make people miss in the backfield. He's similar to Henry, but fits our system better. He has enough strength and fight in him to legitimately think of him as having a little "Beastmode" in him. I see him as a Chris Ivory type of ceiling, (which isn't half bad!)
Prosise PERFECTLY fits that third down/change of pace/ Reggie Bush/Percy Harvin type of player.
With those last two guys think Reggie Bush and Lendale White. It really makes perfect sense considering what happened last year with injuries, and with Lynch's retirement. What happened last year won't happen again.

Which leads me to say, I don't think the focus on RB's and TE's is about Rawls and Graham, it's about Lynch's retirement, and trying to replace Zack Miller! We haven't had a blocking TE since he was cut. That HURT our ability to run two TE sets. Vannett was the best all around Y TE in the draft. That's what we are replacing IMO, our former blocking TE.

Finally, I agree completely with what you said about the low PFF grade. When will these pinheads learn that we don't draft for "value" or to fit what they think would fit our system? We draft FOR US. Period.
)The following isn't aimed at anyone in particular, and not at anyone here, I'm just venting).
Our front office would rather take a guy that everyone in the world says is a huge reach, while passing on a ton of players that everyone in the world thought would perfectly fit our system, and get the guy THEY WANT, regardless of so called "value" (which is nothing more than made up nonsense to keep guys like Kiper working) and regardless of how the so called experts have graded them. Odhiambo was the guy Cable wanted. We'll see if it was a mistake or not, but passing on three guys who everyone had rated high for us, because of their seeming fit as athletic guys with explosiveness, clearly tells us they just don't care what other experts or teams or whoever are saying about these guys.
Until proven otherwise, I'll give our front office the benefit of the doubt here.

Fans have seen this happen every single year (except perhaps the first year when they took Okung and Thomas in the first round), and yet they STILL don't get it. They still get all worked up about what the Seahawks are doing, because they read some magazine, or Mike Mayock's most recent mock draft, or PFF grade on a player, or etc...
I wonder if fans will ever start to just ignore the noise, and understand that John, Pete and Tom know A LOT MORE about these players than some hair-sprayed moron in a suit on TV, or some idiot on a lap top posting from his moms basement does. Everyone thinks they are an expert, everyone thinks they know something about this process, and yet, for the most part, they really don't know more than what anyone else who does a little research does, unless they get inside information. And even that has to be taken with a grain of salt given the head games GM's and coaches play with each other this time of year.
Point is, fans need to RELAX. The Seahawks got 10 guys they liked better than anyone else available to them when they picked, and given their track record of success, I can rest easy knowing that, and knowing, there isn't a better drafting team in the NFL right now.

Who was the back Collins reminds you of from last season? Smith? I don't see that at all. ( or did you mean Ware from two years ago? I don't see that at all either as he was slow footed and pretty pedestrian as a back). Did I miss someone somehow?

HumanCockroach wrote:Who was the back Collins reminds you of from last season? Smith? I don't see that at all. ( or did you mean Ware from two years ago? I don't see that at all either as he was slow footed and pretty pedestrian as a back). Did I miss someone somehow?

I meant Ware from two years ago, my brain got away from me there, I think too fast for my poor typing skills and lose my train of thought sometimes.

As for the draft grades, that and a dollar will get you a cheeseburger off the value menu...

They are absolutely, 100% irrelevant to success, quality or future performance levels. Be it PFF or any other site...

Sherman is spot on, these guys blow it 95% of the time with no ramifications with a "ah well we'll try again next year"... Pretty sure PFF didn't grade the 12' draft real high either.. Depending on what site you feel like visiting, either they were cream or spoiled milk. Take it all with a grain of salt, no one will know for three years anyway..


http://www.sbnation.com/nfl-mock-draft/ ... s-analysis. ----- A-

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000 ... -nfc-teams ------A

Here's some tape on the guy who I personally think has the best chance to make the team as UDFA. He's an absolute MONSTER and extremely ahtletic and quick twitch off the line. I'm surprised he didn't get drafted...no clue why.
Brandin Bryant for your viewing pleasure
https://youtu.be/8M5LKx5-Kp4

monkey wrote:Here's some tape on the guy who I personally think has the best chance to make the team as UDFA. He's an absolute MONSTER and extremely ahtletic and quick twitch off the line. I'm surprised he didn't get drafted...no clue why.
Brandin Bryant for your viewing pleasure
https://youtu.be/8M5LKx5-Kp4

Awesome when he's not blocked.

I find it hard to sit through too much of a youtube vid posted for a guy- you're only going to ppst the plays where he sheds quickly and/or dominates, right? Don't we want to see the plays where he overcomes a legitimate effort from a legit opponent?

Anyway, looks big and quick, but I need a lot more than his highlight reel...

I think this draft was going great until the 3rd round where we seemed to lose focus a little.
At least from the outside looking in it seemed that way.
Vannett is an excellent pick, and Prosise has some promise, but if they had there eyes on 3 RBs, wasn't it a little early?
As well, I heard someone on NFL Radio say that Connor McGovern was a "Goon Guard" meaning he was a tough guy. Pete has stated he wants to get back to being the bully, so why didn't they take him with one of their 3rds? He would fit the bully part much more than Odhiambo. I don't dislike the Odhiambo pick, but it doesn't seem to meet the criteria of what their stated goal is.
Overall it was an interesting draft and I think we came away with as many as 3 starters at some point this year and maybe 4, which is difficult to do on a team with a lot of talent.

Unfortunately PFF didn't bother with draft grades of the 2012 draft, the only thing I can find is the fantasy grading which want complementary, comparing Seattle's drafts to the Browns with no real value ( though they do have one years later expressing how good those picks were... Convenient).

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... -nfc-west/

NorthHawk wrote:As well, I heard someone on NFL Radio say that Connor McGovern was a "Goon Guard" meaning he was a tough guy. Pete has stated he wants to get back to being the bully, so why didn't they take him with one of their 3rds? He would fit the bully part much more than Odhiambo. I don't dislike the Odhiambo pick, but it doesn't seem to meet the criteria of what their stated goal is.

Funny you mention that as Odhiambo won his teams "Goon award" and has incredible natural strength!
Odhiambo easily fits the bully role, even more than McGovern who is admittedly off the charts athletic and likely would also have fit that role to a certain degree, but it was precisely because of his strength that Cable like Odhianbo so much..
Odhiambo is a super, super strong player, from all reports, even more than McGovern is.

No worries, monkey, and a very well thought out post on your part, as usual.

And, naturally, the FA process has already begun, one that has seen us land players previously that fit our system and function well in it.

With CB's, it seems to be one of those skill positions that are more difficult than others to fulfill. And while we've hit pay dirt in recent years with some of our secondary choices, it's still an area where you can never have enough quality depth.

RB was a need, no doubt. I just feel that acquiring a CB as part of the 3rd round would've been a better route to go, especially since we've been searching for a consistent cover man to play opposite of Sherman for the last couple of years now. We all hope Lane can stay healthy and develop, along with Shead. But if any position on that side of the ball needs constant competition, it's that one. Our F.O. has a philosophy that's been working since they arrived. It wouldn't surprise me at all if, in fact, they knew there would be any number of viable DB's go undrafted that would fit our system. Perhaps that was part of the thinking there.

Either way, lots of FA prospects will be making their rounds through team HQ's. I still believe, however, that the nature and severity of Rawls and Graham's injuries factored considerably in their decision to spend 3rd rounders on a RB and TE. And that's an understandable thought process if they share that opinion. On that note, Rawls and Graham are doing all they can to get back on the field, and their presence (especially Rawls) are keys offensively.

I have faith that this will all work out fine, and that we're gonna field a team that will be right back in the thick of making another legit SB run. This draft, to me, was one that produced a solid job of filling needs, while simultaneously avoiding some major over reaching that we see other franchises do routinely.

6 running backs though guys. A little heavy.

Hunt is a solid Center, I hearing that stuff!. He is higher on BState guard than I think but we can hope I am wrong!

Funny you mention that as Odhiambo won his teams "Goon award" and has incredible natural strength!
Odhiambo easily fits the bully role, even more than McGovern who is admittedly off the charts athletic and likely would also have fit that role to a certain degree, but it was precisely because of his strength that Cable like Odhianbo so much..
Odhiambo is a super, super strong player, from all reports, even more than McGovern is.

But does he bring the nasty attitude that we have been missing since Breno left? That's what bullies do, and I've never read any comments to suggest he does.

Zorn76 wrote: It wouldn't surprise me at all if, in fact, they knew there would be any number of viable DB's go undrafted that would fit our system. Perhaps that was part of the thinking there.

Well, looking at the list of guys we've already signed, I'd say that was an accurate assumption on your part.
Darvell Harris, Tyvis Powell (who MANY "experts" had a third round grade on!!) and CSU Corner Deandre Elliot, (who I CANNOT BELIEVE went undrafted! That one is a gigantic shock to me.) Tanner McEvoy from Wisconsin, and Utah State safety Marwin Evans.


There are some real names in this undrafted class, and from what I am seeing, it's our biggest undrafted class yet, by far.
We're actually going to see serious competition not just to make the team, but to even make the 90 man and get a chance to even try to get further!
Pete wanted competition, boy did he go get it!

I'm telling you guys, more and more I get the feeling this is going to be another special year for us, ending with a Lombardi trophy.

NorthHawk wrote:
But does he bring the nasty attitude that we have been missing since Breno left? That's what bullies do, and I've never read any comments to suggest he does.

I guess time will tell. I too had McGovern, Haeg, Dahl and several others as guys I wanted to see us draft. They went with Odhiambo instead of any of them...there has to be a reason that Cable likes him so much.

That leads me to something I've been noticing about this front office for some time now.
When our front office says something, they ACTUALLY mean it! I know that sounds silly to say, but with many other teams, if not most, a lot of what you hear is nothing more than head games.
Our FO doesn't actually play head games, they either say what they mean, EXACTLY what they mean, or they don't say anything at all. They're extremely good at keeping their mouths shut and not allowing leaks of information compared to most teams around the league.

I bring all of that up to point out yet another area I've noticed where, rather than playing a lot of head games, the front office seems pretty up-front about. VMAC official visits/workouts etc... The guys they bring in to look at before the draft, invariably really are the guys they are looking at.
Look at the names of guys we signed UDFA. Look at Rees Odhiambo, who Cable worked out extensively and CLEARLY fell in love with. Same with Hunt. So many of these guys made visits to the VMAC or were worked out or were otherwise scouted heavily and it was reported whether officially or unofficially.
It just seems that our front office is either honest, or quiet, and they don't lie or play games.
Personally I find that refreshing.

BTW, anyone worried about how drafting all these running backs will affect Rawls as he comes back from his broken ankle needs to see this.
https://twitter.com/TRawls810/status/726476799878684672

LOVE IT!

EDIT: He may have just accidentally given us his nickname. Choo choo!
I like it, That could stick. Choo choo.

Good nickname.

This may work out well by keeping Rawls fresh for impact runs (chunk runs, if you will) and the drain of the season.

Wow guys, this is such a great thread from Field Gulls, they've got links to like...everything
One stop reading right here.
http://www.fieldgulls.com/2016/5/1/11548666/seattle-seahawks-2016-nfl-draft-breakdown-recap

Do yourself the favor and click the links provided, check out these guys we just added, including several UDFA's.

BTW, for those of you who were curious or were hoping that the Seahawks would draft Derrick Henry, here's something that should make you feel better.
http://www.arkansasfight.com/2016/4/30/11544750/seattle-seahawks-pick-arkansas-alex-collins-5th-round-nfl-draft?_ga=1.257778251.1168015212.1439351052

The key quote from this piece comes here:

Collins has a highlight real of making the first defender miss in the backfield, setting up a linebacker with a quick first step, and then diving forward for 5 yards.

That, right there, is why powerful runners like Marshawn Lynch,Thomas Rawls, and now Alex Collins are looked at as fits for our offense while another powerful runner like Derrick Henry is not a fit at all.

Collins has that same ability that made Lynch such a force, and that Rawls showed in his limited time last year. The ability to get yards AFTER contact in the backfield.
Where Derrick Henry averaged less than a yard after backfield contact, Collins consistently found ways to make guys miss, and then drive forward to make something out of nothing. Just like Lynch, and just like Rawls.
He fits. It's my opinion he's now the primary bell cow backup, with Prosise as the primary change of pace/third down back backup to Rawls, and I REALLY couldn't be happier!
Think about the backfield we'll be trotting out next year. We'll start with Rawls, who is quite likely going to be one of the leagues leaders in yards and touchdowns. Then when Rawls needs a breather, we'll bring in someone just like him basically, in Collins, who will just continue to POUND defenses into submission. On third downs, and situationally, we'll bring in Prosise whose speed and terrific route running and hands, make him a deadly change of pace guy who can be moved out of the backfield to create instant match up advantages.

Our RB corps just went from a state of "What do we do now without Beastmode?", to "Holy CRAP we've got awesome running backs!"

monkey wrote:That, right there, is why powerful runners like Marshawn Lynch,Thomas Rawls, and now Alex Collins are looked at as fits for our offense while another powerful runner like Derrick Henry is not a fit at all.

Collins has that same ability that made Lynch such a force, and that Rawls showed in his limited time last year. The ability to get yards AFTER contact in the backfield.
Where Derrick Henry averaged less than a yard after backfield contact, Collins consistently found ways to make guys miss, and then drive forward to make something out of nothing. Just like Lynch, and just like Rawls.
He fits. It's my opinion he's now the primary bell cow backup, with Prosise as the primary change of pace/third down back backup to Rawls, and I REALLY couldn't be happier!
Think about the backfield we'll be trotting out next year. We'll start with Rawls, who is quite likely going to be one of the leagues leaders in yards and touchdowns. Then when Rawls needs a breather, we'll bring in someone just like him basically, in Collins, who will just continue to POUND defenses into submission. On third downs, and situationally, we'll bring in Prosise whose speed and terrific route running and hands, make him a deadly change of pace guy who can be moved out of the backfield to create instant match up advantages.

Our RB corps just went from a state of "What do we do now without Beastmode?", to "Holy CRAP we've got awesome running backs!"

I wouldn't hold my breath with Rawls. He's coming off a type of surgery that requires quite a long recovery and has only been off crutches for just over a month. It's one of the reasons why RB was a priority for us this draft.

So when do you think he will he be back at 100% River?

obiken wrote:So when do you think he will he be back at 100% River?

I ain't Riv but I say next season.

c_hawkbob wrote:I ain't Riv but I say next season.

Very possible, and I think that the Hawks are planning for the worst.

Rawls did NOT have surgery with ligament damage ( ie only bone setting) without ligament damage 4-8 week recovery time standard broken bone healing time followed by PT. He should be 100% prior to the season, quite possibly prior to training camp ( though I would expect them to use him sparingly).

http://orthoinfo.aaos.org/topic.cfm?topic=a00391

http://orthoinfo.aaos.org/topic.cfm?topic=a00391

That's accurate, HC (no ligament damage = very good news), but where did you hear there was no ligament damage?

Not saying you're wrong- I honestly don't know and haven't read anything specific- but I'd be very surprised if there wasn't soft tissue damage in an injury like that.

[edit]

These were early stories, so may not be correct, but they indicate there *was* ligament damage:

http://www.seahawks.com/news/2015/12/13 ... injury-win

“He did break his ankle, but I think the torn ligaments are really the problem,” Carroll said.

http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/seah ... vs-ravens/

Seahawks coach Pete Carroll said the injury — which also included torn ligaments — will sideline Rawls the rest of the season.

I don't think all torn ligaments require surgery.
Don't partially torn ones heal with time?

The concern I would have is whether the ligament ever regains it's strength and elasticity to be like it was before the injury.
Today's rehab is far better than it was just a few years ago, but nature takes its own time.

I don't think all torn ligaments require surgery.
Don't partially torn ones heal with time?

Certainly not, and yes, respectively. They don't get near the blood supply bones and muscles do, though, so they heal very, very slowly comparatively. That's why it would be very good news if there was no ligament damage (just broken bones), but (1) that would be surprising with that type of injury, and (2) alas, it doesn't appear to be the case (pending more recent information that perhaps HC read that I haven't found).

The concern I would have is whether the ligament ever regains it's strength and elasticity to be like it was before the injury.

Close enough. Ligaments don't have much elasticity to begin with, so whatever scarring takes place healing the damage isn't much different (I think it's not quite as strong if you were measuring it closely, but in real-world running/cutting, there shouldn't be a noticeable dropoff).

I ain't Riv but I say next season.

Yeah but your pretty close!! hee hee.

I think your right, they say 9 months but I have never seen a FB player come back at 100% till the following year. Sad thing is its the fear factor, that takes along time to get over.

I think they know and thats why all the RB's taken in the draft. Its the only logical conclusion.

burrrton wrote: I don't think all torn ligaments require surgery.
Don't partially torn ones heal with time?

Certainly not, and yes, respectively. They don't get near the blood supply bones and muscles do, though, so they heal very, very slowly comparatively. That's why it would be very good news if there was no ligament damage (just broken bones), but (1) that would be surprising with that type of injury, and (2) alas, it doesn't appear to be the case (pending more recent information that perhaps HC read that I haven't found).

The concern I would have is whether the ligament ever regains it's strength and elasticity to be like it was before the injury.[/quote]

Close enough. Ligaments don't have much elasticity to begin with, so whatever scarring takes place healing the damage isn't much different (I think it's not quite as strong if you were measuring it closely, but in real-world running/cutting, there shouldn't be a noticeable dropoff).[/quote]

Good info.
Thanks burrrton.

An Orthopedic surgeon from Seattle told me a simple truth. The human was not meant for the game of football.

obiken wrote:I think they know and thats why all the RB's taken in the draft. Its the only logical conclusion.

Again, not trying to be argumentative, but its not the only logical anything.
The coaches have said repeatedly they AREN'T worried at all about Rawls. Now they may be hedging their bets a little with all the BR's taken, Rawls injury probably has *something* to do with it, but the reason they drafted so many backs is obvious, it's really about replacing Marshawn Lynch, and Fred Jackson.

Lynch retired, Rawls is coming back from injury, Michaels is a headcase, and Jackson is gone, that left no one.
Now, after the draft, we have several RB's who fit different primary roles again, like we tried to do last year with Beastmode and Fred EX with Rawls backing them up.
Collins is a power runner in the Lynch mold. Prosise is speedy, has great hands, runs great routes, is the perfect third down/change of pace back. Brown also was a former WR, who also is a third down/change of pace type of RB.
So you bring in Collins to compete with and push Rawls, and you bring in Brown after you bring in Prosise, to set up competition between those two for that role.
Boom.
Nothing more complex, nothing more to read into than that.
It's mostly about competition, not Rawls injury.

It's always about competition, but I think Rawles' injury has to factor into it. It'd be irresponsible (and therefor totally uncharacteristic) of Pete not to be prepared for any possible outcome WRT that ankle.

Pete' always upbeat and positive when talking about someone's rehab, it's in his DNA, I take it all with a grain of salt.

HumanCockroach wrote:Rawls did NOT have surgery with ligament damage ( ie only bone setting) without ligament damage 4-8 week recovery time standard broken bone healing time followed by PT. He should be 100% prior to the season, quite possibly prior to training camp ( though I would expect them to use him sparingly).

http://orthoinfo.aaos.org/topic.cfm?topic=a00391

http://orthoinfo.aaos.org/topic.cfm?topic=a00391

Are you saying that he didn't have any ligament damage or that he didn't have any ligament damage that required surgery? My understanding of his original injury that it included some ligament damage.

Agreed about Pete and his descriptions of player injuries and recoveries. Like most coaches, he's always going to give us the rosiest scenario possible.

After going back through it. Initially the report was no ligament damage, that was changed. There was ligament damage. Sorry for the mis information.

edit: and then I stumble across this????

http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/10420/thomas-rawls

So honestly at this point I don't even know if he had surgery at all??

c_hawkbob wrote:It's always about competition, but I think Rawles' injury has to factor into it. It'd be irresponsible (and therefor totally uncharacteristic) of Pete not to be prepared for any possible outcome WRT that ankle.

That's why I said MOSTLY.

Speaking Tuesday, Seahawks coach Pete Carroll said there's no official timeline for Thomas Rawls' (ankle) return.
"Everything’s going well, yeah," Carroll said. "It’s just when (he pushes) to get back we are going to have to see what the timeline is, you know, so we can tell. It’s going good." Rawls' December injury didn't require surgery, but the Seahawks have consistently been vague on his timeline. Per reporter Bob Condotta, the "general feeling" is that Rawls will be ready for Week 1, but could be limited in the preseason. Rawls flashed massive upside as a rookie, but his injury leaves him as a risk/reward RB1/2, at least until we get more information on his recovery. Apr 26 - 7:10 PM

So did he have surgery? This is dated less than a week ago.

Wait a minute, I thought it was a knee injury are you are talking about ankles???