Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
oG1KeNoBi

Packers claim "The Woke One"

25 posts in this topic

What does it all mean? Possible starter? Straight back-up? Who really knows....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does it all mean? Possible starter? Straight back-up? Who really knows....

 

yawn:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Staying away from this backfield which will find itself having to play the passing game a lot because of their crappy defense.

 

I see a Starks-Michael RBBC. As for Montgomery, he's gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not touching this mess

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see him as backup insurance for Starks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not touching this mess

 

Don't have to worry all 3 (CMike, Starks, Ty) are already rostered in my league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, I don't know.

 

I got a waiver in now to drop CMix and pick up JHoward. I think I will stick with Howard since he is not injured (as suspected earlier).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is CMix better than Lacy or Starks?

 

Or is it still the GB O-line?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is CMix better than Lacy or Starks?

 

Or is it still the GB O-line?

The o-line is banged up right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The o-line is banged up right now.

 

Thanks BJ.

 

Looks like it will not matter if CMix or Starks gets the start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Thanks BJ.

 

Looks like it will not matter if CMix or Starks gets the start.

 

nope.

 

it doesn't even matter if the o-line is healthy or not, green bay are stubbornly allergic to running the football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if I'm keeping Jeffrey, Montgomery has to go. #&%@*$¥£√≥!!!

 

I still like Starks(in my lesser league) however. Hope he stays #1 and not a committee with Michael.

 

Oh, and the Packers STILL suck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Christina is the most overhyped player in a lomg time. Not stating Starks this week, but not am I worried about this addition.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its curious though. Wasn't Montgomery doing well in his dual role? Why would they stop using his versatility?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its curious though. Wasn't Montgomery doing well in his dual role? Why would they stop using his versatility?

Mccarthy
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its curious though. Wasn't Montgomery doing well in his dual role? Why would they stop using his versatility?

 

He's got health/injury issues, possibly the sickle-cell trait possibly something else. They tried using him, he did ok but now he may not even play this week (missed practice yesterday and the story I read said it was "illness" not related to sickle-cell.

 

http://www.cbssports.com/fantasy/football/players/1851149/ty-montgomery/

see the player news

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't Christine Michael have a stellar performance in the playoffs last year versus the Packers? I have a feeling that the Packers will be starting him next week in hopes that his aggressive running style works for their offense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't Christine Michael have a stellar performance in the playoffs last year versus the Packers? I have a feeling that the Packers will be starting him next week in hopes that his aggressive running style works for their offense.

The Seahawks did not play the Packes in last year's playoffs, and his playoff stats were not stellar: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MichCh00.htm

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found this info about Montgomery. Evan Silva's column at rotoworld:

 

http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/66736/179/silvas-week-11-matchups?pg=4

 

James Starks returned from his knee injury against Tennessee and took over as Green Bay's lead back after Ty Montgomery missed two first-quarter blitz-pickup assignments that resulted in sacks. On both plays, Montgomery too quickly broke into a route instead of staying in to block. Montgomery went on to manage five touches on a 28% playing-time clip, seeing most of the rest of his action in garbage time alongside Brett Hundley. Starks wound up with ten touches on 71% of the snaps. Until further notice, Starks needs to be approached as the Packers’ lead back and a viable RB2/flex option against Washington’s No. 30 DVOA-rated run defense.

 

As the Packers can't trust Montgomery to be on the field with Rodgers, fantasy owners won't be able to trust Montgomery, either. We also shouldn't trust Packers OC Edgar Bennett's post-game explanation for why Montgomery barely played, blaming it on a "rep count." Montgomery flat out got benched.

 

It would be a surprise if mid-week waiver claim Christine Michael made any Sunday night impact, although his addition could conceivably end the Montgomery-at-running-back experiment for good if Michael eventually earns playing time.

Edited by Wolverines Fan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't Christine Michael have a stellar performance in the playoffs last year versus the Packers? I have a feeling that the Packers will be starting him next week in hopes that his aggressive running style works for their offense.

Actually one of the reasons the hawks let him go was because his LACK of aggressive running. They had to "coach him up" after two games in a row of running out of bounds before contact. He is not a bruiser whatsoever and tends to run out of his shoes, plus he missed the correct hole on many of his runs and tried to bounce outside too many times. They did not trust him and lost confidence.

Edited by heehawks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't Christine Michael have a stellar performance in the playoffs last year versus the Packers? I have a feeling that the Packers will be starting him next week in hopes that his aggressive running style works for their offense.

 

I should have double checked before posting. It was Minnesota where he impressed in the playoffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does it all mean? Possible starter? Straight back-up? Who really knows....

 

The force is strong with this one....

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael is inactive tonight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Packers re-sign Michael today.  Looking like a third stringer to Montgomery/draft pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.