RB/WR Ty Montgomery, NE (2 Viewers)

[massraider]

What a waste.  Could be a discussion about an interesting player.  Instead, it's a beach session from a bunch of people trying to get over.  

Whatever the software you use, that's the rule.  If you use Yahoo, whatever they say.  CBS, fine.  ESPN, great.  

Whiny little posts about what's not fair is really pointless.  

 

[montana_grizzly_bears]

10 games of 162 is a LOWER percentage than 2 games of 16. 

It still doesn't matter. It is written into the rules that a player must play 10 games to gain eligibility. You want it done in your league- write it into the by-laws. It hasnt come up before? Then your SOL for the rest of the season. 

I am willing to bet that in a couple weeks this will be a mute point, because Starks will be back and Davis will be up to speed. Sure Montgomery will get some plays out of the backfield but it won't be the volume it is right now.

 

[Interseptopus]

It still doesn't matter. It is written into the rules that a player must play 10 games to gain eligibility. You want it done in your league- write it into the by-laws. It hasnt come up before? Then your SOL for the rest of the season. 

I am willing to bet that in a couple weeks this will be a mute moot point, because Starks will be back and Davis will be up to speed. Sure Montgomery will get some plays out of the backfield but it won't be the volume it is right now.

sorry... pet peeve. that and people saying "I could care less"... it's couldn't... 

 

[chad in Indy]

I am hoping he has a couple big games over the next couple weeks.  Atl and Indianapolis are good matchups on paper.  I will look to unload after that.  I don't see his stock getting higher and his playoff setup is Seattle, Chicago, Minnesota.  Ouch!  Anybody else see this play out differently?

It would be nice to get some discussion directly on point for Ty again instead of the roster designation.  That topic can be had separately regardless who the player is.  

 

[hamsterdam]

If Monty retains his passing back role ROS like a lot us here predict, Yahoo would look plain silly for maintaining their stance.

I expect them to back pedal and give him RB eligibility if he mainly plays out of the backfield for another 1-3 weeks like he has done against Dallas and Chicago. 

Perhaps farfetched, but the higher ups at Yahoo can't be too thrilled about all the backlash they've been getting about this. Twitter and their uservoice forums are in an uproar. Maybe they're all wrapped up in the buy out, but I wouldn't be surprised if this forces an exec's hand.

 

[Joe Summer]

worrierking:

I may be in dead-horse-beating territory with this by now, but I think it's stupid that the Green Bay Packers can choose to start him at running back but a fantasy owner cannot. If the owner came to me as a commissioner and asked the question "why can't I start him at running back?" I would not have a good answer except maybe that our league software can't handle it. If I said that our league rules did not have a way of handling it, that might fly, but it might also call for some commissioner's ruling or league vote, which would be unsatisfactory.

I don't think you want to set a precedent based solely on where a player lines up on the first snap of the game. Wes Welker started one game at kicker in 2004. Do you think it would have been fair to let someone start him as a fantasy kicker?

 

[Interseptopus]

I am hoping he has a couple big games over the next couple weeks.  Atl and Indianapolis are good matchups on paper.  I will look to unload after that.  I don't see his stock getting higher and his playoff setup is Seattle, Chicago, Minnesota.  Ouch!  Anybody else see this play out differently?

It would be nice to get some discussion directly on point for Ty again instead of the roster designation.  That topic can be had separately regardless who the player is.  

I can see it either way to be honest. Ty has carved out a nice receiving back role. I think teams like Seattle and Minnesota are good examples of teams they will need to pass and change things up in order to beat. I think Chicago too... you just saw how Ty can be effective vs them. You can't tell me they aren't going to shift more help to cover Adams next time, while trying to contain Cobb and Nelson too. Can't shift to cover everyone... maybe that leaves Ty out of the backfield 

It all depends on the running backs they do have. Starks is JAG and can take the goal line carries that Ty, at this point, just can't pound in. But Starks is not as good of a receiver. Davis is a decent goal line back as well, but I don't see him taking over as the bell cow. Not this far into the season. 

I think if you are in PPR Ty has startable value ROS... IMHO

 

[massraider]

If Monty retains his passing back role ROS like a lot us here predict, Yahoo would look plain silly for maintaining their stance.

I expect them to back pedal and give him RB eligibility if he mainly plays out of the backfield for another 1-3 weeks like he has done against Dallas and Chicago. 

Perhaps farfetched, but the higher ups at Yahoo can't be too thrilled about all the backlash they've been getting about this. Twitter and their uservoice forums are in an uproar. Maybe they're all wrapped up in the buy out, but I wouldn't be surprised if this forces an exec's hand.

Yeah, take it to the streets, man!!

 

[chad in Indy]

I can see it either way to be honest. Ty has carved out a nice receiving back role. I think teams like Seattle and Minnesota are good examples of teams they will need to pass and change things up in order to beat. I think Chicago too... you just saw how Ty can be effective vs them. You can't tell me they aren't going to shift more help to cover Adams next time, while trying to contain Cobb and Nelson too. Can't shift to cover everyone... maybe that leaves Ty out of the backfield 

It all depends on the running backs they do have. Starks is JAG and can take the goal line carries that Ty, at this point, just can't pound in. But Starks is not as good of a receiver. Davis is a decent goal line back as well, but I don't see him taking over as the bell cow. Not this far into the season. 

I think if you are in PPR Ty has startable value ROS... IMHO

PPR, I agree.  I am in standard scoring league, so my decision is slated.  He just isn't a very good route runner and is average between the tackles which is why I see him limited against teams like Seattle and Min.

 

[Interseptopus]

PPR, I agree.  I am in standard scoring league, so my decision is slated.  He just isn't a very good route runner and is average between the tackles which is why I see him limited against teams like Seattle and Min.

For that I agree. His route running is actually pretty good as a WR, but as a RB he is obviously raw. I'd probably sell him as you suggested if I had him in standard, unless I needed the help at WR/RB 

 

[JFS171]

His injury last year was serious.

Ty Montgomery's injury was serious.


Montgomery said his surgery contained three parts: tight ropes inserted into his ligaments to hold them in place, a cartilage repair and — perhaps most serious — a microfracture procedure on his talus (a bone between the heel and fibula and tibia).

“I think there’s a stigma with a sprain,” Montgomery said. “But what I think a lot of people don’t understand is sprain means partial tear. And people forget I had the surgery in December.”

I have literally had the exact same surgery, complete with talus microfracture.  Recovery was long and slow and no fun, and that was as a 31 YO who basically just ran and did some cross fit and amateur sports for fun.  As a professional athlete, I can only imagine it'd be hellacious.  BUT, I did feel relatively close to 100% about a 12-14 months post-op, which I would assume if Montgomery isn't there yet, he's getting close.

 

[Interseptopus]

I have literally had the exact same surgery, complete with talus microfracture.  Recovery was long and slow and no fun, and that was as a 31 YO who basically just ran and did some cross fit and amateur sports for fun.  As a professional athlete, I can only imagine it'd be hellacious.  BUT, I did feel relatively close to 100% about a 12-14 months post-op, which I would assume if Montgomery isn't there yet, he's getting close.

This is similar to Tommy John surgery in MLB... similar. It's the best analogy I can think of honestly, but the procedures are very different. Minus the microfracture. So add that in and maybe that puts it into perspective for some folks. 

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I am willing to bet that in a couple weeks this will be a mute point,

Well at least we won't have to hear from it anymore once it's mute.

 

[ATB]

He's a WR/RB now. What's done is done. 

More importantly: what do we see him actually producing going forward? 

Will Davis & Jackson eat into his snaps at RB? Will they vulture goal line carries? 

I think that's a more productive way to discuss this player instead of whining about his fantasy position.

 

[Dizzy]

Seems like being a RB would hurt his value, since they're considered so expendable. 

Agreed. It probably would not apply in this case. I was just offering up a possible explanation for the CYA disclaimer being issued by the NFL.

 

[mnmplayer]

Well at least we won't have to hear from it anymore once it's mute.

I could care less for mute points.

 

[DansRams]

TY really looked good yesterday. He caught the ball away from his body very well and was very smooth transitioning from catch to runner. He will possibly be a usable fantasy asset this year, a valuable fantasy asset next season, and a potential stud in 17.

His current value is much lower than it should be in Dynasty

Spot on!

 

[Hilts]

sorry... pet peeve. that and people saying "I could care less"... it's couldn't... 

Speaking of pet peeves, why is it folks instantly accuse someone of being a hater or missing out if they're remotely critical of something? I didn't miss out. I don't care what they decide. I get to start a running back at wr, which is amazing. I just pointed out the logic they used was pretty dumb.

Anyhow, I think he's locked in as a Theo Riddick type but with wr eligibility once the other guys get healthy. 

 

[montana_grizzly_bears]

I could care less for mute points.

Yes, please focus on my grammar and punctuation rather than the point of my post. Your league didn't plan; ESPN, Yahoo, W/E else didn't plan- you are the one screwed not them. No reason to flood them with complaints because your league cannot plan.

 

[hamsterdam]

I don't care what they decide. I get to start a running back at wr, which is amazing. I just pointed out the logic they used was pretty dumb.

This is pretty much the reason why I think he should be dual eligible this season.

The fact that giving people free RB production in their WR slot isn't a problem but apparently giving correct designation and getting points for the actual position he's playing is ? Perhaps not the end of the world, but there are implications to this.

I get the argument that he's only been back there 2 games but what if he does what most suspect, and retains the passing back role ROS?

 

[worrierking]

worrierking:
 

I don't think you want to set a precedent based solely on where a player lines up on the first snap of the game. Wes Welker started one game at kicker in 2004. Do you think it would have been fair to let someone start him as a fantasy kicker?

In my leagues the kicker only gets points for kicking, not receiving, rushing, TDs etc.  You would get nothing for starting him as a kicker.

 

[zftcg]

sorry... pet peeve. that and people saying "I could care less"... it's couldn't... 

First of all, the correct term is "moo point". It's like a cow's opinion. It doesn't matter.

Second, I disagree that "could care less" is wrong. It's clearly meant to be sarcastic: "I could care less, it's theoretically possible, but it's highly unlikely." It's kind of like when people say "fat chance" when what they actually mean is "slim chance". More here.

/tangent

 

[Interseptopus]

First of all, the correct term is "moo point". It's like a cow's opinion. It doesn't matter.

Second, I disagree that "could care less" is wrong. It's clearly meant to be sarcastic: "I could care less, it's theoretically possible, but it's highly unlikely." It's kind of like when people say "fat chance" when what they actually mean is "slim chance". More here.

/tangent

Interesting... learn something new! 

 

[Warhogs]

I expect Knile Davis to be much more involved on Sunday.  Prior to last game he only had a couple days with the team and was just playing on the scout team.  With 10 days between games he should be ready to be more heavily involved.  Ty has done great filling in as needed I just expect those snaps as a RB to be quite a bit less.  I would still say I think Starks is the favorite to get most of the RB work once he is healthy.

 

[BobbyLayne]

moot point. A debatable question, an issue open to argument; also, an irrelevant question, a matter of no importance. For example, Whether Shakespeare actually wrote the poem remains a moot point among critics, or It's a moot point among critics, or It's a moot point whether the chicken or the egg came first.

 

[BobbyLayne]

I expect Knile Davis to be much more involved on Sunday.  Prior to last game he only had a couple days with the team and was just playing on the scout team.  With 10 days between games he should be ready to be more heavily involved.  Ty has done great filling in as needed I just expect those snaps as a RB to be quite a bit less.  I would still say I think Starks is the favorite to get most of the RB work once he is healthy.

Bookmark this for Week 12-13.

Think you're wrong on both counts but in reality no one knows. I think the job is Montgomery's and Davis is a warm body. Starks has been flat awful this year. We shall see.

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

Bookmark this for Week 12-13.

Think you're wrong on both counts but in reality no one knows. I think the job is Montgomery's and Davis is a warm body. Starks has been flat awful this year. We shall see.

Part of me believes there was a plan to work Montgomery in as the pass catching back no matter what. It would explain why the Packers chose to only keep two running backs on the active roster but 7 wide receivers. That said, there hand was forced when both Lacy and Starks went down with injury.

I believe Knile Davis could be serviceable in this offense. He's a one cut zone runner, which is how the offense is setup. I could see him carving a role here, with Montgomery handling pass catching duties. 

 

[zftcg]

Part of me believes there was a plan to work Montgomery in as the pass catching back no matter what. It would explain why the Packers chose to only keep two running backs on the active roster but 7 wide receivers. That said, there hand was forced when both Lacy and Starks went down with injury.

I believe Knile Davis could be serviceable in this offense. He's a one cut zone runner, which is how the offense is setup. I could see him carving a role here, with Montgomery handling pass catching duties. 

Honestly don't know what to think of Davis. He looked like a promising RB2 a couple years ago, and then suddenly last year he couldn't even crack RB3 despite a bunch of injuries in KC.

I still think the most likely outcome for Ty is passing back in a pass-heavy offense, similar to White/Lewis for the Pats (maybe more similar to White than to Lewis). And I don't really see how the performance of Starks/Davis/Jackson has much of an impact on that role. But none of us really knows.

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

I don't have inside knowledge but I expect Davis to mostly take over kick return duties so Montgomery no longer has that on his plate. Davis may get a few snaps on offense but I see zero fantasy value for him unless more injuries strike.

 

[Interseptopus]

Status just changed to Questionable... not sure why. I'll find out what I can from my buddy who has more access to inside info

 

[Warhogs]

Honestly don't know what to think of Davis. He looked like a promising RB2 a couple years ago, and then suddenly last year he couldn't even crack RB3 despite a bunch of injuries in KC.

I still think the most likely outcome for Ty is passing back in a pass-heavy offense, similar to White/Lewis for the Pats (maybe more similar to White than to Lewis). And I don't really see how the performance of Starks/Davis/Jackson has much of an impact on that role. But none of us really knows.

The difference I see in this comparison are White/Lewis were RB that developed into pass catchers.  Montgomery looks to me more like a WR who has been lining up as a RB due to injuries.  Again, he has filled in admirably the past couple of weeks, he just doesn't look like a very natural RB to me from what I have seen.  Any other opinions on that?  Maybe others watching the Packers feel differently so I am curious about that.  I still think if Starks gets healthy he will get most of the RB work.

 

[Interseptopus]

The difference I see in this comparison are White/Lewis were RB that developed into pass catchers.  Montgomery looks to me more like a WR who has been lining up as a RB due to injuries.  Again, he has filled in admirably the past couple of weeks, he just doesn't look like a very natural RB to me from what I have seen.  Any other opinions on that?  Maybe others watching the Packers feel differently so I am curious about that.  I still think if Starks gets healthy he will get most of the RB work.

This was discussed a lot in the Chi at GB game thread last week. I compared him to Peterson based on their measurables (ONLY measurables). He does look like a lot of backs who are tall and thin. Not your Steven Jackson, Marshawn Lynch, etc pounders that you really don't want to be in front of. Doesn't mean he won't be successful. 

He looks raw. And he should. He started his career as a WR. He converted from RB I believe. I think watching the games he's been used in... he isn't used like a traditional running back all the time. The plays he gets the ball work for his skill set. And that's what a good coach would do- don't fit a square peg into a round hole. 

 

[chad in Indy]

Status just changed to Questionable... not sure why. I'll find out what I can from my buddy who has more access to inside info

It lists limited practice for "illness" on the packers' website

 

[zftcg]

The difference I see in this comparison are White/Lewis were RB that developed into pass catchers.  Montgomery looks to me more like a WR who has been lining up as a RB due to injuries.  Again, he has filled in admirably the past couple of weeks, he just doesn't look like a very natural RB to me from what I have seen.  Any other opinions on that?  Maybe others watching the Packers feel differently so I am curious about that.  I still think if Starks gets healthy he will get most of the RB work.

How many between-the-tackles carries has White had this year? (Not being rhetorical, I have no idea). My sense is Lewis was actually a decent runner, but White is mostly limited to draws and such. Anyway, that's how I could see Ty's role evolving. Yes, he's not as polished as the guys who have been RBs their whole career, but you'd figure his technique will improve over time.

I think the real determinant will be how the offense works with him in there. Last Thursday was promising, but then again, it was the Bears. Still, it's not like Starks was setting the world on fire, this year or at any point in his career. And let's not forget the overall league-wide trend of passing-down backs becoming more integral parts of their teams' offenses (Lewis, Woodhead, Riddick, Duke, etc).

Again, I'm not saying this will definitely happen. None of us knows. And if Ty flames out, I'll move on. But I think the potential is definitely there.

 

[Interseptopus]

It lists limited practice for "illness" on the packers' website

Ill from the anticipation on how bad he is going to run all over ATL this weekend

 

[Absolutely Nothing]

Is he for real? In a league I'm in, he's sitting on the wire... I'm in a good place, and I certainly don't need another RB, but seeing as I got a whole two points combined from AR15 Jordy and Cooper last week I'm thinking of picking him up... Adams is also on the wire, for reference. 

 

[Weebs210]

Anyone who owns Ty Mont, if Don Jackson would not have been injured on his first run do you think Ty would of had as big of a role last game?  I have a gut feeling Knile Davis is going to have a big role going forward. McCarthy jut stated Knile is in the game plan against Atlanta. 

 

[Tony97gtp]

Is he for real? In a league I'm in, he's sitting on the wire... I'm in a good place, and I certainly don't need another RB, but seeing as I got a whole two points combined from AR15 Jordy and Cooper last week I'm thinking of picking him up... Adams is also on the wire, for reference. 

Pretty sure I'm playing ty over ARob this weekend. Not sure if I'm more happy I grabbed ty last week, or more pissed that arob has been this bad...

 

[hamsterdam]

Anyone who owns Ty Mont, if Don Jackson would not have been injured on his first run do you think Ty would of had as big of a role last game?  I have a gut feeling Knile Davis is going to have a big role going forward. McCarthy jut stated Knile is in the game plan against Atlanta. 

He's in the game plan as the big back but I believe Monty has the receiving back role in the bag. 

If you use the Cowboys game as an example, Lacy got 17 carries and Monty still had 10 receptions and a couple carries. Not saying he'll get 10 rec again but it can work.

Monty's entire value is based on the belief that he'll remain the receiving back no matter who plays the big back. He was getting no playing time at WR before the Cowboys game, so if you think his role is in question, then his value should definitely be in question.

 

[Tommy Collins]

He's in the game plan as the big back but I believe Monty has the receiving back role in the bag. 

If you use the Cowboys game as an example, Lacy got 17 carries and Monty still had 10 receptions and a couple carries. Not saying he'll get 10 rec again but it can work.

Monty's entire value is based on the belief that he'll remain the receiving back no matter who plays the big back. He was getting no playing time at WR before the Cowboys game, so if you think his role is in question, then his value should definitely be in question.

The Packers offense really hasn't looked like it's 2014 form in a long time. With Ty back there it was the closest to performing near that level since then. I have to imagine the team would continue to utilize him rather than moving away from something that is working. 

 

[ATB]

Anyone have the video of Rodgers saying "why the #### was he on the bench?" in reference to TyMo??

 

[ConnSKINS26]

Anyone have the video of Rodgers saying "why the #### was he on the bench?" in reference to TyMo??

This happened? that's good stuff if so. best thing Ty can have going for him (besides playing well) is Rodgers trusting him and wanting him on the field

 

[CaptainJT]

Has anyone heard anything about about how practice went today? Who took snaps with first team... who was at RB... who was at WR... who watched... who was sick with an illness... who went to Burger King to get Eddie Lacy's Whoppers...

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Has anyone heard anything about about how practice went today? Who took snaps with first team... who was at RB... who was at WR... who watched... who was sick with an illness... who went to Burger King to get Eddie Lacy's Whoppers...

We get very little practice details on who does exactly what for any team midseason anymore. As much as we get is yes-no-limited and some talk about class/film room stuff.

 

[cjv123]

Packers will throw 50+ times a game now.Own all of them you can, esp in PPR. I am starting both Adams and TyMo

 

[TheBottomLine]

I'm considering benching Nuk and I'm definitely benching Robinson to start Cobb and either Adams or Montgomery.  I'd like to start all 3 but I can't.  Volume should be there but starting three WRs from same team is just crazy to think about. 

Edit:  Second thought, it's really only two WRs and a RB. 

 

[BobbyLayne]

I'm considering benching Nuk and I'm definitely benching Robinson to start Cobb and either Adams or Montgomery.  I'd like to start all 3 but I can't.  Volume should be there but starting three WRs from same team is just crazy to think about. 

Edit:  Second thought, it's really only two WRs and a RB. 

I'd leave Nuk where you always have him. He gets 8 targets a game. I don't care how bad Osweiler has looked - I've yet to see him be accurate or display any vertical game - but Casey freaking Keenum went 27/32. With 2 drops. In Detroit. I'd jam every Texan you can find into your lineup this week. Oh, and Slay is out as well. Do not bench Hopkins this week.

 

[TheBottomLine]

I'd leave Nuk where you always have him. He gets 8 targets a game. I don't care how bad Osweiler has looked - I've yet to see him be accurate or display any vertical game - but Casey freaking Keenum went 27/32. With 2 drops. In Detroit. I'd jam every Texan you can find into your lineup this week. Oh, and Slay is out as well. Do not bench Hopkins this week.

I'm not taking him out of my lineup but just saying it is tempting to start a couple of the GB guys. 

 

[BobbyLayne]

I'm not taking him out of my lineup but just saying it is tempting to start a couple of the GB guys. 

Yeah although I often start pairs of WRs it does feel riskier. I started Fuller & Hopkins together Weeks 2-4. Pretty neat when you're 18th round flyer outperforms your 1.05.

Right now I have Adams on the bench with Montgomery starting.

 

[Team Smokin']

I'm buying TY Montgomery and my patience is waning with A Robinson. All the Sharks went all in on Robinson several weeks ago. He did okay for a couple weeks...always thinking about last years performance. Looking at starting TY over ARob this week and prolly moving forward. I like getting credit for rushes in the WR department. Now, will TY hit paydirt this week? Seems like destiny this week...