thatguythere
Footballguy
Packers might as well get the IR ready. That's where he's headed if they think he can keep it up.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
RB/WR Ty Montgomery, NE (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Run It Up
- Start date
hamsterdam
Footballguy
Yeah they're getting pummeled with tweets already. They can't leave so many salty users in the dust. I suspect a change soon.
Dondante
Footballguy
hamsterdam
Footballguy
Yep, he's basically GB's Dion Lewis / Riddick / Sproles / Woodhead. I think he'll thrive if they keep featuring it, and he'll firmly be in my RB2 spot ROS in .5 PPR. Would be amazing after losing Lacy.
Last edited by a moderator:
mnmplayer
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
cr8f
Footballguy
Rotoworld has him at RB now and asked MFL if they are following suit.Agreed, except he has WR designation while the others don't
thatguythere
Footballguy
TheAssassin
Footballguy
So if my ESPN league has a 5 RB max, do i have to drop him with 5 RBs + TM?
BroncoFreak_2K3
sucker for Orange
MFL Reply:
Last edited by a moderator:
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
Nobody is going to vote to change Montgomerys position since it only helps his owner, so guess he's staying put in most MFL leagues
And this is absolutely the rightful call. Changing positional eligibility in season is a slippery slope.
Phantom Knight
Footballguy
Yes, each commissioner may make the following change:Does anyone know if MFL has the capabilities for multiple positions? I kind of need Ty WR eligible for week 9
From BroncoFreak_2K3: (MFL reply to help ticket): In addition, if you wish to allow your owners to be able to change the player's position, you can enable the option "Allow owners to change the position of these players back and forth between the MyFantasyLeague.com default position and your custom position" on the Change Player Position screen. Then after that is done, the owners will be able to use the For Owners>Change My Player Position option to adjust the position of their player each week as needed.
Last edited by a moderator:
BroncoFreak_2K3
sucker for Orange
MFL allows it, but that would never fly in any league Im in or commish. Total BS.
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
![[scooter]](/data/avatars/m/22/22287.jpg?1659477690){kind=avatar}
[scooter]
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Tommy Collins
Footballguy
I think it's lame for him to be given RB by those sites. He's a WR. Until he's a RB on the official DC he should continue to be listed at WR. How many times do we see a RB line up wide? Or a TE as a WR? Remember Jimmy Graham wanting to be paid like a WR because he was split wide so often? He was still a TE. What makes this situation any different? He has played a role at RB for 2 weeks and there is no known long term role for him at RB as far as any of us know. I think it's foolish to be making any changes mid-year.
For the record, I own Ty in my money leagues.
For the record, I own Ty in my money leagues.
hamsterdam
Footballguy
Lol @ people saying it's unfair to give position eligibility even if he's playing majority snaps there.
I just find it funny that most people saying it's not fair says so because they want RB production in a WR slot. Yeah that's perfectly fair ?
I just find it funny that most people saying it's not fair says so because they want RB production in a WR slot. Yeah that's perfectly fair ?
Tommy Collins
Footballguy
Hu-Tang Clan
Footballguy
Of course Montgomery owners want him to have both designations, but the other 11 owners in the league wouldn't want that.
King of the Jungle
Footballguy
voiceofunreason
Footballguy
He's playing at rb now and he put up zero numbers as a wr. Its actually ridiculous that you can start him as a wr. He has no short or long term role at wr.
Last edited by a moderator:
Exactly. Unless your league weighs scoring differently for RB/WR, the only benefit in this case is flexibility. In the case of Colston, that flexibility was more significant, since it's typically hard to get WR production out of your TE slot. But Joe Webb was the real game changer, since in most leagues QBs significantly outperform WRs. I started him in my championship game that year and he put up like 20 points, which was mediocre for a QB but a huge game for a WR.
Whatever you think of the Montgomery decision, its impact is likely to be minor.
Hu-Tang Clan
Footballguy
He had 9 carries last week and 10 receptions so he may have lined up in the back a lot but he definitely didn't put up zero numbers as a WR.
hamsterdam
Footballguy
In certain formats I'd imagine so, and it's not even about positions as a whole it's about one player who is playing more than 90% of his snaps in position that is not assigned to him.
I don't think examples of RBs lining up at WR once in a while, or Tavon Austin getting a couple sweeps out of the backfield a game is a good argument in this scenario, as they are not seeing majority snaps there.
I just wanted to point out the irony of people on their high horse crying out cheating or that it's not fair, apparently think it's okay or fair that people can slot a RB in WR, a position that he does not even play.
Last edited by a moderator:
jtd13
Footballguy
I think his point was that most of his routes were run out of the backfield, so he was a "RB" on those plays, even though he caught the ball.
Tommy Collins
Footballguy
Ty Montgomery was drafted in 2015 as a WR out of Stanford. He was a WR for the Packers in 2015. He was a WR for the Packers in 2016. He has been listed as a WR for the Packers since he was drafted. Ty Montgomery is a WR. For you to assume he has no short or long term role at WR is nothing more than that, an assumption. He has been used as a RB for 2 games to get them through. The team traded for a RB and promoted one from their PS. They also have Starks coming back in a few weeks. You are making assumptions.
It was not until the team was hit with injuries to their RBs before Ty began to get a significant amount of snaps at RB. He has been used primarily as a pass catcher out of the backfield. But this justifies him to be re-classified as a RB mid-year? Because of 2 games? What happens if Knile Davis & James Starks regain the RB snaps and Montgomery is relegated to running out wide? Is his designation going to be taken away, because he's a WR then? This is foolish.
This is amazing. He has been a WR since he was drafted in 2015 and until 2 weeks ago, was a WR. He plays RB for 2 games and now he doesn't even play WR?
If the Packers put him on the DC as a RB, fair game. Until then, he should remain a WR.
I'm out of this discussion as apparently logic is not going to apply here.
Last edited by a moderator:
hamsterdam
Footballguy
Let me ask you this then. If he gets his position changed to RB because he's playing majority snaps there ROS, are you okay with them taking away the WR tag?
If they take him out of the passing back role, then yeah sure, take back the RB eligibility. But you and I both know that he's not going away from it.
I don't care where anyone is drafted, if they don't play that position anymore then they shouldn't be eligible there.
Its not just 2 games he's played more RB snaps than WR the entire season, and it's going to continue.
So have fun getting RB numbers in your WR slot, cause yeah that's completely fair ?
Last edited by a moderator:
Cowboysfan8
Footballguy
I sure wish they would change him to wr/rb. And if they could do it before I enter my ww bids tonight that would be awesome
You said yourself the guy is getting a significant amount of snaps at RB.
Sounds like a guy that should be eligible at RB to me
That doesn't pass as logical to you?
Joe Summer
Footballguy
His eligibility should be based primarily on his NFL roster designation and his uniform number, not his snap count.
Tommy Collins
Footballguy
Sure
Agreed. Nothing I say has any bearing on this. As far as Rodgers comments, he said "I think he's a running back now." Doesn't mean he is. He doesn't make that call, just like I don't.
If he were RB moving forward, yes. But a 2 week timespan when the team was hit with the injury bug is a tough sell. If this continues ROS then by all means it makes sense. But right now none of us know what's going to happen.You said yourself the guy is getting a significant amount of snaps at RB.
Sounds like a guy that should be eligible at RB to me
That doesn't pass as logical to you?
Gottabesweet
Footballguy
Is Montgomery only a 3-4 week solid producer while until they can go back to a more traditional RB role? or do we see this happening going forward with 15+ total touches.
thatguythere
Footballguy
McCarthy isn't happy he has three RB's injured, so now he is going to start working on the WR injuries.
Raiderfan32904
Footballguy
I think he's everything they wanted Cobb to be. He's a weapon. They hitched their wagon to a couple of stiff RB's in Lacy and Starks. If they continue to win dinking and dunking down the field, why break the recipe? I don't know if it's sustainable, but I don't think Knile Davis is going to be a threat to Ty's workload. That guy sucks.
hamsterdam
Footballguy
I think how it plays out is like the Cowboys game with Lacy playing.
Lacy got 17 carries, and Monty got his passing back production which we've seen now against the Bears as well.
However I don't think Knile / Starks hit 17 carries on average and will probably be seeing 10-12 unless it's a blowout and they're running the clock out.
Neither is a threat to Montys actual role as the pass catching back IMO.
Lacy got 17 carries, and Monty got his passing back production which we've seen now against the Bears as well.
However I don't think Knile / Starks hit 17 carries on average and will probably be seeing 10-12 unless it's a blowout and they're running the clock out.
Neither is a threat to Montys actual role as the pass catching back IMO.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
They've changed DJ Foster from WR to RB this season.Hu-Tang Clan said:
Joe Summer
Footballguy
Foster was converted to RB before training camp even started. His official NFL position has always been RB and his uniform # has always been 27.
So if MFL changed anything, it was only to correct their own (wrong) assumption that he would be a WR.
So if MFL changed anything, it was only to correct their own (wrong) assumption that he would be a WR.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Yeah, maybe but the question was whether MFL ever changed a player's positional designation, so I answered that question.
mnmplayer
Footballguy
It's quite an advantage to roster this fellow. I was always a sucker for getting McCluster on my team when he was in KC because of his WR/RB designation. "If he breaks out, what an advantage he will be through the bye weeks." I thought. Well looks like I am finally going to cash in on this swiss army knife type versatility advantage I always dreamed with in McCluster, but with an elite QB running the offense. I know Rodgers can make 2-5 yards swing passes work.. 
I am already seeing him ranked as high as top WR5 for week 8. I was hoping he would be a solid high floor WR3. This is like landing an elite WR1 who you can spot fill for RB on certain weeks LMAO. Of course its only 2 weeks of production and 3 makes a trend. I have said that for Quincy Enunwa and Meridith this year and neither made it to a solid game 3 performance so here's hoping Ty keeps the role in spite of Knile Davis learning the book over the long week. Tempering expectations for top5WR, but still feel he is a strong WR3/RB2 play which is where most of us will play him.
I am already seeing him ranked as high as top WR5 for week 8. I was hoping he would be a solid high floor WR3. This is like landing an elite WR1 who you can spot fill for RB on certain weeks LMAO. Of course its only 2 weeks of production and 3 makes a trend. I have said that for Quincy Enunwa and Meridith this year and neither made it to a solid game 3 performance so here's hoping Ty keeps the role in spite of Knile Davis learning the book over the long week. Tempering expectations for top5WR, but still feel he is a strong WR3/RB2 play which is where most of us will play him.
Raiderfan32904
Footballguy
worrierking
Footballguy
I really don't see any logic in denying a guy running back status when he is clearly being used at the position. Leagues can handle this differently, but setting some minimum number of games (or snaps) to qualify is done in fantasy baseball all the time. Manny Machado won a lot of people championships this year by playing 40 games at SS.
This is easy to make work. Just come up with some standards (and do it in advance).
This is easy to make work. Just come up with some standards (and do it in advance).
Joe Summer
Footballguy
Because it is a slippery slope. Who decides the official # of snaps before a player is eligible for a particular position? Can you play one snap out of the backfield and then get RB eligibility for the entire year? If Tom Brady kicks an extra point, can I start him at kicker for the rest of the season?
