Yeah, looks like Morency will get a few carries here with Wynn going back to the locker room (for cramps)After that drive , I say Wynn.. wow
good point. i'll just pick up LT off the waiver wire instead.GB RB situation will be a mess all year, stay away
good point. i'll just pick up LT off the waiver wire instead.GB RB situation will be a mess all year, stay away
I thought they looked better running the ball with Wynn. Morency did well as the third-down RB. There weren't many positives to come out of the game last night given how the Packers handed Chicago the ballgame but I thought the running game finally looked like it has a chance to be effective. The Bears' D may not be quite as good as it was last season but I still think they can get after you in the running game. But the Packers held up against them and ran well for the most part. It's too bad Wynn had to leave early because he looked sensational on the opening drive. Morency's best work came as a receiver; he did a good job catching the ball on check downs and getting solid yardage after the catch. Both looked like Barry Sanders and Jim Brown compared to Brandon Jackson. Consistency is the key so we need to see if they can deliver at a solid level for more than just one game. But coming out of last night it would appear Wynn is the guy to target as the starter and Morency as the third-down RB. Both would have solid RB3 value (Morency in PPR leagues) if they can keep those roles and show consistency. That last part is the critical question here.I don't know how this will play out, but the Packers looked better when Morency was in the game.
Wynn had some nice runs. But Morency came in and had that quicker burst.The other thing I saw late was on the outside runs, Wynn just kept running right into the line...thinking there should be a hole. But in that blocking scheme there is no designated hole. Several times it looked as if one cut would do it at least to fall for a yard or two...instead he ran right into the back of the linemen for no gain.Did Morency get hurt though? Looked like he came out at one point holding his one shoulder low.I thought they looked better running the ball with Wynn. Morency did well as the third-down RB. There weren't many positives to come out of the game last night given how the Packers handed Chicago the ballgame but I thought the running game finally looked like it has a chance to be effective. The Bears' D may not be quite as good as it was last season but I still think they can get after you in the running game. But the Packers held up against them and ran well for the most part. It's too bad Wynn had to leave early because he looked sensational on the opening drive. Morency's best work came as a receiver; he did a good job catching the ball on check downs and getting solid yardage after the catch. Both looked like Barry Sanders and Jim Brown compared to Brandon Jackson. Consistency is the key so we need to see if they can deliver at a solid level for more than just one game. But coming out of last night it would appear Wynn is the guy to target as the starter and Morency as the third-down RB. Both would have solid RB3 value (Morency in PPR leagues) if they can keep those roles and show consistency. That last part is the critical question here.I don't know how this will play out, but the Packers looked better when Morency was in the game.
I seem to recall similar things being said about Antowain Smith and Kevin Faulk in NE a few years ago. And GB is one of the rare teams that can claim a good enough QB to compensate for lack of talent at RB the way that Brady and Co. did in NE back then.Neither. RBBC. Wynn is too slow and Morency is not built to be "the guy."
It's definitely a RBBC situation. However, last night was the first time all season where I thought that maybe - just maybe - there could be some fantasy value to be mined from the GB backfield. I wouldn't be starting Wynn or Morency as anything more than RB3s but if last night was a positive sign in my opinion that the Packers may not be a graveyard for fantasy value in the backfield. I still wouldn't trust either of them just yet but I'd definitely be OK with having one of them on my bench just to see how things played out. To me, this looks like what the Pittman/Graham thing looked like last week for the Bucs. We spent a lot of time discussing which of those RBs would have more value and it was pretty much an equal split in opinions. I see something similar here with Morency being Green Bay's Pittman and Wynn being Green Bay's Graham.Neither. RBBC.
Barring injuries to Wynn or Morency, Brandon Jackson shouldn't even be on the active list on game days for the remainder of the season. He's terrible.
It's definitely a RBBC situation. However, last night was the first time all season where I thought that maybe - just maybe - there could be some fantasy value to be mined from the GB backfield. I wouldn't be starting Wynn or Morency as anything more than RB3s but if last night was a positive sign in my opinion that the Packers may not be a graveyard for fantasy value in the backfield. I still wouldn't trust either of them just yet but I'd definitely be OK with having one of them on my bench just to see how things played out. To me, this looks like what the Pittman/Graham thing looked like last week for the Bucs. We spent a lot of time discussing which of those RBs would have more value and it was pretty much an equal split in opinions. I see something similar here with Morency being Green Bay's Pittman and Wynn being Green Bay's Graham.Neither. RBBC.
I didn't realize Wynn had an edge in blocking. Unusual for a rookie.My money is on Wynn holding off Jackson for the early-down role simply because he is far superior at protecting Favre.
That is how he got on the field to begin with, because Jackson couldn't pass protect well enough to save Favre. Wynn was put in the 3rd down role with Morency out because he was solid in pass protection.Eagle Eye said:I didn't realize Wynn had an edge in blocking. Unusual for a rookie.Cheesedawg said:My money is on Wynn holding off Jackson for the early-down role simply because he is far superior at protecting Favre.
Thats probably not what the GB coachimg staff thinks , unless they like Wynn so much that he will be the man and Morency 3rd down .But what i saw yesterday is that they really dont think of Morency as far as featured back ( He did well like a Kevin Faulk when he comes in , but is nt a every down back ) so if it s not Jackson it will be Wynn.packersfan said:Barring injuries to Wynn or Morency, Brandon Jackson shouldn't even be on the active list on game days for the remainder of the season. He's terrible.
I thought the same thing, when they talked about him needing fluids in the first half. I guess he got the wrong message from McCarthy's "that won't happen again" after the timeout issue. Guess Wynn thought he should take himself out much sooner, so he wouldn't have to waste a timeout. Somehow I don't think that's what McCarthy meant.Man in the yellow hat said:I keep looking for the article where it talk about how Wynn was sick all day long with the flu or something. Seriously. I know it was hot in Green Bay, but the guy had one long run then asked out of the game for cramps. This is the second time this season the guy had displayed a complete lack of toughness. The first was calling a timeout to he could get off the field after tweaking his ankle. Wynn looked good in spots, but he strikes me as guy who has no mental toughness. Not a good sign for a guy who is going to play in some cold, cold weather.
Both are rookies...Eagle Eye said:I didn't realize Wynn had an edge in blocking. Unusual for a rookie.Cheesedawg said:My money is on Wynn holding off Jackson for the early-down role simply because he is far superior at protecting Favre.
My bad...I thought he was comparing him to Morency as a blocker.Both are rookies...Eagle Eye said:I didn't realize Wynn had an edge in blocking. Unusual for a rookie.Cheesedawg said:My money is on Wynn holding off Jackson for the early-down role simply because he is far superior at protecting Favre.