Receiver Group Comes Down To Montgomery

The wide receiver position has become an early and popular topic of conversation surrounding the 2016 Green Bay Packers.  Most of that conversation has centered around the possibility of the team keeping seven on the roster after adding fifth-rounder Trevor Davis.  The assumption is that Jordy Nelson, Randall Cobb, Davante Adams and Ty Montgomery will man the top four spots on the depth chart followed by Jeff Janis, who should be safe if only for his solid special teams play, and then Davis and Jared Abbrederis.  

Injury can easily make this decision for the Packers and we know the team has dealt with their fair share of those.  The question is whether or not injury has already decided how this position group will look.  Montgomery suffered a bad high ankle sprain in week six of last season.  He rehabbed the injury and tried to return in November, only to suffer a setback.  He tried one more time in December, unsuccessfully, before the team decided to put him on injured reserve.  Montgomery had surgery in early January to repair the ligament damage and is targeting a return during training camp.

While youth is on Montgomery's side, in terms of his ability to recover, this injury appears to be taking a long time to heal.  The longer injuries take to get better, the more questions that arise and doubt starts to increase.  During an appearance on the Bill Michaels show, Mike Clemens of Sirius XM Radio said that Montgomery's situation currently doesn't look very promising.  While it seems like forever before the upcoming season starts, training camp is just seven weeks away.  In terms or recovering from a major injury, that's not a lot of time.  If the worst case scenario plays out, Montgomery could be placed on injured reserve this season and won't play at all.  Or, he may become a candidate for injured reserve- designated to return or the physically unable to perform list.  In either case, he would be ineligible to join the team until mid-season or later.

Montgomery is saying all of the right things in terms of his recovery efforts and his expectation of being back to 100% by the start of the season.  While each player is different in how they heal, the Packers have been here before.  As fans, we know that the Packers won't be very forthcoming about players and their injury status.  In 2010 and 2011, Mike Neal spent more time in the trainers room than on the field before finally becoming a contributor.  In 2012, receiver Greg Jennings was out nearly half of the season with a core injury that led to weekly questions about when he would return.  Last season, Sam Shields missed the better part of a month with a severe concussion after the weekly game of "will he or won't he be available?".  And one of the most famous examples was Aaron Rodgers' recovery from his broken collarbone in 2013.  While most knew it was a long-term recovery, awaiting the return of the quarterback, especially of Rodgers' caliber, caused weekly hysteria among fans.

Ankle and leg injuries are tough to heal and come back from.  So, at the very least, we have to be patient when it comes to Montgomery's timetable to return to football.  While the ACL and Achilles tears get all of the press as far as long-term injuries, they're also very straight forward.  If a player suffers one of those two, they're probably going to miss a year or close to it.  With an ankle sprain, a player can miss a week or six months.  The Packers have mostly been on the conservative side of bringing a player back from injury so while it's frustrating that it's unknown how well Montgomery's ankle is healing, it's a good bet that when (hopefully not if) he's back on the field participating fully, there is high confidence that he's in physical shape to do so.

With this in mind, talk about the make up of the Packers receiver group may need to take a back seat for awhile.

-------------------

Jason is a freelance writer on staff since 2012 and also co-hosts Cheesehead TV Live, Pulse of the Pack and Pack A Day podcasts.  You can follow him on Twitter here

NFL Categories: 
0 points

Comments (77)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
jasonperone's picture

June 06, 2016 at 05:57 am

Still just one IR-return spot per season

0 points
0
0
Horse's picture

June 06, 2016 at 06:15 am

PUP would make more sense.

Montgomery is draft gold. They'd be crazy to put him back on the field too soon and risk his career.

0 points
0
0
Gianich's picture

June 09, 2016 at 03:12 pm

I am willing to bet a lot that he starts the year on PUP.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

June 06, 2016 at 07:02 am

I hate that its only 1 person per team per season. With the amount of injuries that football has, I really wish they would change that rule.

Didn't they change it so you no longer have to designate that player to return. Now anyone that goes on IR can return? Just 1person can be brought back.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

June 06, 2016 at 06:40 am

It's not easy for any WR to come in and contribute in an Offense as complicated as the Packers. He hadn't done much as a whole but if you look at his stats we were just starting to see how McCarthy was using him. With each passing week he was more and more involved so the reality is you have no idea what he would have done.

His last full game, just the 5th of his career he caught 4 balls on 5 targets for 59 yards and a TD and that was against a pretty good defense in the Rams. He also had 4 receptions for 66 yards and a TD on 3rd downs so obviously Rodgers had began to trust him on a 3rd down AND he had begun to deliver. The kid is MEGA Talented. It must be draining to be you Cow, to never look at anything or anybody in a positive light must be exhausting!

0 points
0
0
Horse's picture

June 06, 2016 at 07:13 am

Saw him play in person. Defenders are scared he'll hurt them.

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

June 06, 2016 at 07:52 am

Montgomery adds physicality unlike any WR on the team. Only Janis comes close. When healthy. I consider Montgomery a super-valuable, all-around weapon (Slot WR, RB, Returner, even Outside WR if needed).

Pure roster gold. So I'm glad our coaches won't rush him.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

June 06, 2016 at 09:32 am

I completely agree..

I really think Montgomery is going to be our x-factor on offense. The one player that can change our offense or take it to a new level. His ability to play everywhere will put a lot of stress on defenses.

If they go to a 5 WR set, it will force defenses to go into a DB heavy defense. Which then they can slide Montgomery into the backfield and still have a rushing threat.

0 points
0
0
Ibleedgreenmore's picture

June 06, 2016 at 11:22 am

Ty is very gifted, I saw him throw defenders to the ground after he caught several passes.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

June 06, 2016 at 06:59 am

Montgomery is my biggest question mark to start the season.
I have said I could see the Packers keeping 7 WR's. But a real possible reason why they would keep 6 is injuries. And if Montgomery has some sort of set back to start the season, he could be placed on the pup list to start the season.

Montgomery is a player I am really excited to see what he does with the team. His versatility really gives the offense flexibility and gives McCarthy a lot ability to be creative with formations and plays being called. I think he will add a whole new dimension to the offense once he is fully ready to play. Hopefully to start the season.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

June 06, 2016 at 07:33 am

Yes, the IR designated to return rule has changed. Teams no longer have to designate which players who are put on IR are designated to return. In other words, GB can put 4 players on IR, and can later choose which player can return to the active roster. It is still limited to just one player. The player is eligible to return after 6 weeks of being on the IR.

http://www.ninersnation.com/2016/3/23/11290692/nfl-changes-ir-designated...
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/03/23/rule-change-could-add-st...

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

June 06, 2016 at 09:38 am

Great. thanks for that.

I thought they did change it.

Now they need to allow more then 1 player to come back from IR.

I wish they would adapt a MLB type of thing. MLB has the 15 day DL. Well how about do a 4 game short term IR? If they want to limit it, do it so you can have 2 players on it at any point or something.

With the player safety and concerns, why wouldn't they want to do something that didn't force teams to keep injured players on their roster, when they could go onto a disabled list allowing the team to bring in new healthy players to take those reps.
I really wish they would do something like that.

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

June 06, 2016 at 07:56 am

If he starts on the PUP to be for sure about his ankle, that's cool. Then we can keep either Adams or Abbrederis (whoever would have been cut), and see if any other WR gets hurt in Weeks 1-6.

If Montgomery is ready Week 1, we just make a tough decision between Abby and Adams (provided no one else is hurt). Either way, it's nice to have depth.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

June 06, 2016 at 08:21 am

If Montgomery is healthy, and all the other WR's are healthy. I really can see a possibility that they keep 7 WR's. Just from last years roster they will be gaining 2 spots on offense from not keeping a 3rd QB and 2nd FB. Like you said in the post below they could keep 2 HB's and use Montgomery and Cobb as HB's, which would open another Roster spot.

That's the ability that I like from Montgomery. He provides that extra dimension of being able to be used as RB. I think he is going to be a special player and could be the piece that puts our offense over the top against defenses.

I'm not saying they will keep 7, i just think its a realistic possibility.

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

June 06, 2016 at 07:40 am

Montgomery could be absolute roster gold, so I'd only have him start the season if he's 110%. Otherwise, PUP.

Think about it. We need at least 1 extra spot to stockpile young O-Linemen for next season. Maybe 2. We're also overloaded in the Defensive Front 7 (which is wonderful), and at CB.

Meanwhile, Crockett isn't a critical RB at all--just a guy, really. So with both Cobb and Montgomery, we could easily save a roster spot by carrying only 2 HB's, with a couple rookie HB's on the Practice Squad available for call-up. In game, if either Lacy or Starks goes down, you just move Montgomery to HB. Then call up a rook on Tuesday.

Like I said, Monty's roster gold. Make sure he's 110%.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

June 06, 2016 at 08:53 am

Now now Cow. Cheer up. Things are not that bleak.

0 points
0
0
ray nichkee's picture

June 06, 2016 at 09:24 am

It's too early to be like that cowpie, are you still on a drinking binge from last night?

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

June 06, 2016 at 09:30 am

its Monday. no one is happy that its Monday.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

June 06, 2016 at 09:53 am

I have issues with certain players and take the heat for it but you basically said the entire receiver group, including the TE without having to say it, can be released and we would be the better for it.

This level of rant is merely ' shock jock ' talk to get clicks. You're better than this....c'mon. : )

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

June 06, 2016 at 10:19 am

Wow...even disagreeing with Cow gets dislikes....very clique-esk. : )

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

June 06, 2016 at 10:30 am

and cow got a like for his. lol.

0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

June 06, 2016 at 11:22 am

I've long suspected that Cow is a self liker.

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

June 06, 2016 at 12:06 pm

Many people here are @Bear. But it's only a handful of people who goes around disliking.

0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

June 06, 2016 at 12:21 pm

i guess lots of vikings fans here... dislike anything positive about the packers...

0 points
0
0
al bundy's picture

June 06, 2016 at 10:45 am

Im with Cow on this. You got a guy named Janis who can't get on the field. The water boy saw more action. Has to be a dam good reason and it aint the great talent in front of him.

Cobb is so so. He got his bell rung good and never came back to his old self.
Adams is a jerk with poor hands and route running skills.
Abby is one concussion from opening a watermelon stand.
Monty will never fully recover from his injury. You never get 100 back from ligament damage and I think that is his injury they never talk about.
Jordy should be ok, his speed and age are catching up to him for sure.
Two tight ends, one sucks and the other may not even play till the season starts.
Fact is this is a very suspect set of receivers.
I agree lets keep some extra O linemen, they will be mostly toast by game 4 as usually.

0 points
0
0
PaulRosik's picture

June 06, 2016 at 11:21 am

Now Cow is a Packer hater and is only happy when the Packers lose. But there wasn't a one of this group that played last season who could get off the line of scrimmage and get open. A lot needs to be seen from the receivers in 2016.

0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

June 06, 2016 at 12:26 pm

a lot of that had to do with the stubbornness of play calling and also the stubbornness of the star QB to not throw to young WRs not named Adams... Once the young guys had to play when everyone else was out injured, suddenly they made plays...

ever seen a WR formation last season with 3 stacked? play calling was to send 2 or 3 WRs downfield hoping they could morph into Jordy, have R. Rodgers run a 2 yard route and then sprint sideline to sideline hoping to get a 10 yard gain out of it, or have the back-shoulder throw to Adams, hoping he'd be like Jordy in that respect. Problem is, nobody on this roster is Jordy except Jordy himself.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

June 06, 2016 at 04:45 pm

Packer Pete. You nailed it. So so true.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

June 06, 2016 at 08:40 pm

Having to keep 7 WRs is a sign of a weak WR corps, not of a strong one, in general. It may be that the light comes on for Janis and Adams, or Davis, and we keep 7 WRs because the 7th WR is just too good to cut. The more likely reason is that the coaches see only 3 or 4 WRs who obviously can play, and 3 or 4 more who have untapped potential.

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

June 06, 2016 at 09:15 pm

I agree.

0 points
0
0
ben's picture

June 06, 2016 at 01:07 pm

Receiver A
6'0" 221. 4.55 forty, 4.21 shuttle, 6.97 cone, 16 reps.
Fair College WR Production:
172 rec. 2125 yds. 15 TDs
overall didn't bring the spark expected on special teams as a returner. A bit inconsistent as a WR, taking advantage of about 1/2 of his opportunities.
Has significant injury concerns.

Receiver B
6'3" 219, 4.42 forty, 3.98 shuttle, 6.64 cone, 20 reps.
Incredible college WR production:
246 rec. 4305 yds. 46 TDs
Has shined on special teams. One of the best packer special teamer for the last 2 years.(except for covering 1 punt against the rams). Has made the most of every LIMITED opportunity given to him as a WR. Also has shown the knack for making big plays.
Zero injury concerns ever.

"The assumption is that Jordy Nelson, Randall Cobb, Davante Adams and ReceiverA will man the top four spots on the depth chart followed by ReceiverB, who should be safe if only for his solid special teams play."

nobody here can keep it real. TT, MM, the author of this article, & you homer drones.

you deserve your mediocrity

0 points
0
0
ray nichkee's picture

June 06, 2016 at 10:13 am

Anytime I see an empty glass showcase I always crown it the vikings superbowl trophy case.

0 points
0
0
4EVER's picture

June 06, 2016 at 10:55 am

I can't disagree. Rodgers make the adjustments? The only receiver capable of and getting separation last year, yet he's running the wrong routes. A know brainer and baffling together in the same sentence...go figure.

0 points
0
0
PaulRosik's picture

June 06, 2016 at 11:26 am

Janis has indeed been a special teams standout and that will keep him on the roster. As for his LIMITED opportunities on offense that is because no one has any idea where he is going to be at the end of the play. Rodgers doesn't know, McCarthy doesn't know, even Janis doesn't know where he will be by the end of the play. And until he learns to run the patterns the playbook specifies he will continue to get LIMITED opportunities.

0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

June 06, 2016 at 12:30 pm

well he made a couple of great adjustments in the AZ game on the hail mary throws. i'm also counting the one in the middle of the field, not just the one in the end zone. the guy can play. problem was maybe that he ran the wrong routes, but maybe also that the throws didn't exactly get to the spot they were supposed to...
he also displayed more play making ability in one single game than Adams did in his whole 2 yr tenure with the packers, yet they're trotting (that's the right word, as he certainly is neither quick nor fast) Adams out there every time they can...

0 points
0
0
PaulRosik's picture

June 06, 2016 at 03:18 pm

Adams play against Dallas in the playoffs was sick. But yes last year he was a statue. With hands to match.

0 points
0
0
jasonperone's picture

June 06, 2016 at 07:30 pm

Commenter B (ironic, eh?): Cranky, may need a nap.

Who IS Johnny Lang? Don't put too much time in on it, just drone through

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

June 07, 2016 at 05:46 am

"overall didn't bring the spark expected on special teams as a returner. A bit inconsistent as a WR, taking advantage of about 1/2 of his opportunities."

http://www.gostanford.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=208167727

That's a list of Montgomerys accomplishments, most of them AS a Returner but plenty as a WR . I have NO IDEA WTF you're talking about when "He didn't bring the spark as a returner". He was an First Team All Amercan his Junior year as a returner year and did quite well in him limited time last season in Green bay.

You might also want to check his 40 times when he ran it 211 pounds, it was 4.38. Granted it was at his pro day but it was also at a lighter weight which can be seen in the time.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

June 07, 2016 at 09:11 am

I saw that 4.38 second time in one place (CBS - see the Rotoworld link), but never again, Nick. I remember the two of us discussing this last year. Have you seen that number reported by any other reputable source?

"I was lighter and felt more flexible," said Montgomery. "I've shed 10 pounds and got my stride back. ... Most importantly, I was able to sleep. At the combine, I got no sleep. I didn't go to bed until 1:30 a.m. and woke up at 6 a.m. to go perform. I didn't do horribly, but I did a lot better out here." Montgomery measured in at 5-foot-11 3/4 and 211 pounds, more than two inches shorter and nine pounds lighter than his listed dimensions. CBS reported that he ran 4.38 seconds in the 40-yard dash at Stanford's scouting event, while NFL.com's Gil Brandt reported seperate (sic) times of 4.51 and 4.5. Regardless, Montgomery spoke to Texans director of college scouting Jon Carr after his drills and was put through additional pass-catching work, TFY Draft Insider's Tony Pauline reported."

If Montgomery had run a legitimate 4.38 forty, I don't think he'd have said that he'd didn't do horribly - he'd be flipping cartwheels and jumping up and down. Looks like one unidentified guy from CBS clocked him at 4.38 while others, like Gil Brandt, had him at 4.50 and 4.51.

I've never read anything about Monty being a speed demon; no comparison with Janis or Shields. I am not buying the 4.38 time.

I think Monty's a 4.51 to 4.55 guy, and the 4.38 is false.

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dsprofile.php?pyid=119917&draftyear...

http://www.rotoworld.com/recent/cfb/130953/ty-montgomery

0 points
0
0
ben's picture

June 06, 2016 at 10:26 am

2016 53 MAN
QB: Rodgers, Hundley
RB: Eddie, Starks, Jackson, Crockett
FB: Kuhn
WR: Jordy, Cobb, Janis, Abbrederis, Adams, Davis, Montgomery
TE: Cook, Richard, Ripkowski
OL: Baktiari, Sitton, Linsley, Lang, Bulaga, Spriggs, Tretter, Barclay, Taylor
DL: Daniels, Pennel, Lowery, Datone, Ringo, Clark, Guion
OLB: Peppers, Elliott, Fackerell
ILB: Matthews, Perry, Barrington, Martinez, Ryan
CB: Shields, Randall, Rollins, Gunter, Goodson, Hawkins
S: Burnett, Dix, Hyde, Banjo
ST: Crosby, Mortell

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

June 06, 2016 at 10:36 am

Please don't go here...

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

June 06, 2016 at 12:08 pm

Lol

0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

June 06, 2016 at 12:32 pm

sure keep 7 DL for a team which plays a 3-4 D and doesn't even play in base D that often... that alone tells me you really don't know what you're talking about...

0 points
0
0
ben's picture

June 06, 2016 at 01:23 pm

I think we agree Pete. I've been saying it over an over on here for years, "that a team that plays a 3-4 D and doesn't even play in base D that often." doesn't need to use many roster spots for their defensive line. (although admittedly, in hindsight, I was wrong as thru injury and inept play the packers have need those DL roster spots)

that's why i'm saying the packers should only keep 7 defensive lineman

0 points
0
0
ben's picture

June 06, 2016 at 01:26 pm

but yea,
I'm the 1 on here that doesn't know what they are talking about

you guys are really something else

0 points
0
0
cdobrose's picture

June 06, 2016 at 12:47 pm

Very unlikely the packers go into the season without a long-snapper on the roster.

0 points
0
0
ben's picture

June 06, 2016 at 01:33 pm

David Baktiari, Josh Sitton, Corey Linsley, Johnny Lang, Brian Bulaga, Ass Kicker Spriggs, Tretter, Donald Barclay, or Lane Taylor are probably capable at snapping a ball.

They are all professional athletes. 3 of which hike a ball for a living.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

June 06, 2016 at 02:47 pm

OK...I try to be somewhat tolerant of the trolling, but this repeated "any OL can be your LS" shows how little you understand football or player/roster management. These OL who practice full-time at their individual positions (or in the Packers case, many play more than one) then must take on the almost full-time job of practicing special teams and long-snapping? Really?

There's no room for error in LS, and you need a guy who is automatic. That doesn't happen by spending 15 minutes a couple days per week working on it. If it made sense for teams to double over their LS to save a roster spot, how come NONE (and I feel pretty confident in that assertion) of the 32 NFL teams do it?

0 points
0
0
4EVER's picture

June 06, 2016 at 04:51 pm

I'm ready coach, send me in...

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

June 07, 2016 at 06:15 am

He did it last time too, actually he copy and pasted the same roster!!!! LMFAO!!!

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

June 06, 2016 at 02:53 pm

Who the hell is "Johnny Lang"?

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

June 06, 2016 at 04:48 pm

Guitar player/singer but I didnt get it either.

0 points
0
0
cdobrose's picture

June 06, 2016 at 05:54 pm

Surely you jest. Long snapper has become so specialized and exacting a position that virtually every (if not every) team has a guy that only does that. This player has to snap the ball 7 yards to the holder and get it within an inch or two of the target every time, and have the laces in the proper orientation most of the time. Also needs to shoot the ball 15 yards through his legs and get it in the hands of the punter accurately and consistently. Any error in this will most likely lead to a loss of the game (I don't know the exact stats on the win/loss percentage for a team that has a punt or fieldgoal blocked but I would say it is heavily on the loss side).

It is not a matter of "could they train Linsley to long-snap". Maybe they could, maybe they couldn't. Practicing at this position takes so much time you really can't practice doing something else. Also teams don't want their long snappers getting injured so they usually don't do anything but long-snapping (for example they don't play on kickoffs on ST). In an extreme emergency they might put the long-snapper in to play offensive line--but I have never seen this actually happen.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

June 06, 2016 at 08:14 pm

I would add that many LS aren't OL by training. Many are DL or LB or TE. These are guys who learned that their best chance to play on Sundays would be to be excellent at this one thing, and then to be able to hustle down the field and be in the mix to make a tackle. Christian Ringo was apparently a LS.

I sure wouldn't want Linsley in the middle of that scrum, then running 40 yards to try to tackle a guy.

0 points
0
0
Finwiz's picture

June 06, 2016 at 03:44 pm

I got news for you on your 53 man.....Ripkowski is not a TE and Kuhn isn't on the team, nor will he be. And I seriously doubt they will keep 7 WR as much as all of CheeseheadTV wants them to. This is a fools game at this point.

0 points
0
0
Teflon Ted's picture

June 06, 2016 at 11:05 am

I think we keep all 7 of these guys. Montgomery and Janis are so talented they can play multiple positions on the team. Monty can be used as a rb in emergency situations and save them a spot there. Maybe it's just me but if they can't find a way to get Janis on the field as a receiver perhaps bulk the guy up some and give him a try at tight end. It's been done before with success. The Packers are notorious for playing musical positions with players. Lord knows we need talent and speed at the tight end position behind Cook (when or if healthy).

0 points
0
0
RobinsonDavis's picture

June 06, 2016 at 12:20 pm

I really think that three things need focus with respect to the WR debate:

1) Will the SCHEME change? If others can get their WRs open, why can't we? Everybody has been blaming the WRs, Even Cobb is getting blamed although he played with one arm all season (tough!!). This is not to say the WRs are blameless, but the shear lack of willingness to change the scheme last year when everybody recognized the passing game was struggling, and DBs were jumping our routes, was baffling to me.

2) Will AR and the Packer brass accept their own responsibility for getting these additional WRs (those others than Nelson & Cobb) game-ready...or stated differently, on the same page with AR BEFORE the season begins?

3) What really are the expectations with respect to the different injuries? The use of "suspect" to address the WR's IS accurate when talking injury status. Montgomery is not playing, Nelson looks like he will, Abbrederis and Adams do have the injury history to give one pause. This is not a declaration on their ability, but you have to play to perform. I maintain my point from much earlier in the year, that Montgomery may be starting the year on the IR, leaving 6 WRs on the roster to start the season, and 4 TEs...you need big bodies on ST too and the injury bug has camped in the TE arena as well.

0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

June 06, 2016 at 12:35 pm

I got no problem with your statement. the only thing I hope that everyone, including Adams, will be kept to the same standard. Judging by last season, that wasn't the case...

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

June 06, 2016 at 01:02 pm

Cobb too?

0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

June 06, 2016 at 01:44 pm

absolutely. Every single player on the roster, in this example specifically the WRs. Ideally, one should keep the best 53, even though there is always a trade-off by positions, as some are better on ST. But within a position group, one would hope that the best players are kept, and of the ones kept, that the best players are active and play on Sundays, no matter what round they were drafted in, or whether they were drafted at all...

I know that money talks, and nobody wants to see a player who makes 8+ million that season inactive or benched even if healthy, but I do find it ridiculous that coaches sometimes stand there with a straight face and claim that they're keeping the best players and they are playing the best players. But some are obviously more equal than others, to use a quote from a particularly good George Orwell book...

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

June 06, 2016 at 01:55 pm

Ok, cool. I respect that. I just want to see the same amount of criticism for all WRs that Adams received last season and is still receiving.

0 points
0
0
PaulRosik's picture

June 06, 2016 at 04:10 pm

If you cant trust the guy you cant trust the guy. If Janis is supposed to be there, but is instead here and does that often then he will be nothing but a special teams player for life. No matter how fast he can run if he is running in the wrong place he won't get on the field.

0 points
0
0
4EVER's picture

June 07, 2016 at 11:09 am

deleted

0 points
0
0
RobinsonDavis's picture

June 06, 2016 at 01:06 pm

Thanks for this! I disagree with Pete's points more than other writers normally, but I feel this article is right-on. An additional subject Mr Daugherty points to, but does not go into depth, is who is competing for which spot and where does Davis fit? Although, Davis could find time in the slot, I am in total agreement that Davis and Janis are targeted for the outside WRs positions.

0 points
0
0
realitybytez's picture

June 06, 2016 at 07:06 pm

"And Cow for some strange reason seems to bask in the attention he receives for posting ridiculous things."

every forum has that guy.

0 points
0
0
cdobrose's picture

June 06, 2016 at 12:42 pm

The Packers will not waste the IR to return status on a player who is not ready to go for the pre-season. They will simply not allow that player to practice and if they can't go by the needed cutdown they will put him on PUP.

0 points
0
0
4EVER's picture

June 06, 2016 at 04:43 pm

Let's just say, I've dropped reading books for cheeseheadtv!.This is getting good, and informative! Great job fellas...Go Pack Go!

0 points
0
0
Clay the 1st's picture

June 06, 2016 at 06:47 pm

I'm glad Montgomery was even written about. I have seen articles that don't even mention him in the receiving corps. I really liked what I saw from him. Just my fan perspective, but I think without the injury he could easily get the number 3 receiver spot, YES on the outside. Also as has been written he is like a bigger Cobb. Too damn bad about that injury but I am holding out hope.

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

June 06, 2016 at 10:00 pm

Totally random:

I wonder if the "we need more speed" claims would've been made if we made plays like this when they were presented:

https://youtu.be/Qi-kl1Vtxpk?t=20m2s

Cobb...

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

June 07, 2016 at 10:01 am

I don't agree. It is 3rd and 9. SF blitzed 7 men. AR had a "hot read" and never looks at Cobb, who in any event was bracketed by #25 (Jimmie Ward) 6 yards off the LOS who lets him go (Ward picks up RR, who tried to chip but the LB took an inside rush, so RR then released into the flat, missing or perhaps correctly ignoring the delayed blitzer, #29 - depends on what RR was supposed to do), and Cobb does not go by the FS (the veteran, Eric Reid, #35) who is nine yards off the LOS until AR has started his motion to throw an out pattern to Jones. In fact, the LB (#53) has an unimpeded lane to AR when the ball is just leaving AR's hand. Reid never reacted in any way to Cobb because he had read AR's eyes and motion. Reid never even bothered to backpedal, much less turn and run with Cobb. I suppose Reid could have been grossly negligent in ignoring Cobb, since it looks like Reid has no other coverage responsibility. Cobb knows he is about to be wide open and waves his hand, but it is too late by then. IMO, if it had looked like GB was going to pick up the blitz (they kept Starks in to block and RR was supposed to chip - they had 6 or 7 blockers), Reid would have picked up Cobb, but maybe AR could have looked him off for a big play to Cobb. AR does complete the out to JJ for a 1st down.

I note that the SF CB gave JJ a 4 yard cushion. Seeing that, AR used JJ as the hot read. The other SF CB gave Adams a 7 yard cushion, but AR never bothered to look at Adams. Kinda telling.

0 points
0
0
Finwiz's picture

June 07, 2016 at 12:08 pm

TGR - I understand your point, and great analysis btw, but you need to consider the fact that Rodgers did waaay to much of eye balling his primary receiver last year, and NOT going through his progressions. He used to go through his progressions a lot better than he did last year. This could be a combination of poor offensive line pro, OR, perhaps Rodgers is "gun shy" now about getting hit, since he's had some lost time due to injuries the last few years, and has taken more than his share of hits. Whatever the case may be, coaching or poor pass pro, they need to get the guy into his progressions more and not focus on the primary receiver. Big plays come from progression "reads". Of course it didn't help that you had "fat Eddy" to allow the linebacker to not stay home and respect the run, but that's why it's a "team game", and not all on just ONE guy.

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

June 07, 2016 at 03:36 pm

@Reynoldo But that blitz was nowhere near Rodgers on that play. If you pause at 20:04 you can see Cobb running full speed with his hand up already because he's going to blaze by the CB and Safety (who is still flatfooted). Rodgers still has the ball in his hands and the blitz is nowhere near him. We all know how fast Rodgers can release a ball. Rodgers had his mind made the second the ball was snapped and that's what hurt us a lot of last season.

But that's beside the point. We had many plays that we missed last season where if Rodgers and the WR connected I don't think we would've seen those "we need more speed" claims. I would have posted them but I didn't want to spread them around articles that had nothing to do with the clips.

Montgomery had a shot (very 1st play of the 49ers game...but he dropped it)
Cobb had shots
Janis had shots (probably the most)
I even remember Richard Rodgers having a couple of shots

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

June 07, 2016 at 10:05 am

Darn you, Drealyn, now that you got me started, I watched 5 more games instead of doing what I was supposed to do! Oh well, watching GB game tape is never entirely wasted time!

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

June 07, 2016 at 03:21 pm

Ha! Aye, we love the Pack and the regular season can't come fast enough. Hell, I'm eager for Training Camp and Pre-Season games.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

June 07, 2016 at 08:50 pm

We're good, Drealyn. I myself criticized AR for locking in on one receiver too much last year. I should have acknowledged that AR never scanned the field at all more in my initial reply, even if I give AR a pass on that criticism given the situation.

And since I watched hours of GB tape due to your post of this video, I failed to fire up the slow cooker for dinner tonight. Now I am scrambling to make dinner, so my son is the chief victim here! Well, dinner is almost served.

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

June 08, 2016 at 03:58 pm

Lol. I get the same way at times. I had it bad (real bad) last season. Hopefully we don't look so bad Offensively and don't have to study film to find players to point fingers at this season.

0 points
0
0