Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

How many teams are going to copy the Ty Montgomery strategy?


michaelredd9
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, stevegrab said:

 

Haven't we seen that before though, with the backup RB on a team, like Michael Turner I think it was with the Chargers behind LT. Can he produce again this year and have the highest YPC or be near the top?

 

 

It's true that lots of running backs have put up large ypc in a limited role and then failed when they got the lead back role.  Michael Turner and Jamaal Charles are an exception.  A lot of the times it's been a 3rd down back or a back who played a lot during garbage time.  A player running the ball on 3rd and long or when a defense is playing prevent defense is going to get inflated stats.  Even luck can be involved since a couple of long runs can greatly inflate the ypc of a player who gets less than 100 carries.  Montgomery did his damage on 1st and 2nd downs in close games.  Only 3 of Montgomery's carries came on 3rd down.  Montgomery also didn't get garbage time carries.  But his ypc is only one aspect.  The more important aspect is that the whole offense clicked when he was on the field.  Defenses had trouble adjusting.  

 

5 receiver/tight end sets have been used with success by some of the better quarterbacks in recent times.  Starting off with a wide receiver in the backfield and putting him in motion forces the defense to set up to play the run and then to have to make an adjustment if the wide receiver comes up to the line of scrimmage.  It is something that is simple for the offense but complicates things for the defense.  The quarterback can also keep the wide receiver in the backfield if he thinks he'll need pass protection.  He can also hand the ball off.  It creates 3 options that the defense has to take into account instead of 2.   Aaron Rodgers has the perfect skill-set for this strategy.  He doesn't need a running back for pass protection as much as other quarterbacks because he is a great scrambler.  He is also a cerebral quarterback that can read defenses.  Drew Brees also has great scrambling skills and is a cerebral quarterback that can read defenses.  I think this is why Alvin Kamara is practicing at wide receiver.

Edited by michaelredd9
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, LordOpie said:

Some of you are missing the point of the thread... He's suggesting that gadget players might get more touches and become less of a gimmick and more common. 

 

Take advantage of this before others do? 

 

Percy Harvin and Cordelle Patterson may have something to add to that then, and its not good.

 

Could also be that in Green Bay Ty was always a better fit for a COP back role then WR too...:shrug:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Def. said:

 

Percy Harvin and Cordelle Patterson may have something to add to that then, and its not good.

 

 

Percy Harvin was better than people remember.  He had 60 catches his first year, 71 catches his second year, and 87 catches his 3rd year.  They also gave him 52 carries in his 3rd year which he turned into 345 yards for an average of 6.6 ypc.  When they motioned him from wide receiver into the backfield, it threw defenses for a loop.  He had a season ending injury in the 9th game of his 4th year but had 59 catches in the first 8 games of that season.  The Seahawks thought highly enough of him to trade 1st, 3rd and 7th round picks for him.  Whereas most gadget players are only athletic and don't have either wide receiver or running back skills, Harvin had both skill-sets.  If he hadn't had health issues and attitude problems, the sky was the limit.  He would have been a perfect fit for what the Packers are doing.  My guess is he would have been better than Ty Montgomery playing as a running back.

 

It won't surprise me if the Raiders try to use Corderrelle Patterson as a rb/wr hybrid like Montgomery.  He has the size to be a running back.  And Derek Carr did his best work in 4 and 5 receiver sets last year including 16 touchdowns and only 2 interceptions for a passer rating of 101.8.  It could be a nice change of pace from the Marshawn Lynch power run game.

Edited by michaelredd9
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we need a definition of that the "Ty Montgomery Strategy" actually is. Is it:

1. Put a WR in the backfield and use him as a RB?

2. Line a WR up in the backfield as an RB, then motion him out?

3. Both?

4. Puddy

 

If it's just put a WR in the backfield that's not very creative. Motioning a WR out from the RB positions seems like something defenses can adjust to rather quickly, which I think they did with Ty last year. He was pretty good weeks 6, 7, 9 and then  - other than the Chicago game as others mentioned - basically turtled the rest of the year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, stethant said:

I think we need a definition of that the "Ty Montgomery Strategy" actually is. Is it:

1. Put a WR in the backfield and use him as a RB?

2. Line a WR up in the backfield as an RB, then motion him out?

3. Both?

4. Puddy

 

If it's just put a WR in the backfield that's not very creative. Motioning a WR out from the RB positions seems like something defenses can adjust to rather quickly, which I think they did with Ty last year. He was pretty good weeks 6, 7, 9 and then  - other than the Chicago game as others mentioned - basically turtled the rest of the year.

 

I would define the Ty Montgomery strategy as having a player who lines up as a running back in the backfield but often goes in motion up to the line of scrimmage to become a wide receiver.  How often he runs the ball, runs a pass route from the running back position, stays in to pass protect, or goes up to the line of scrimmage to be a wide receiver can change each game depending on how the defense is defending it and what is working.  The point of the strategy is to be unpredictable and to force the defense to make adjustments.  I think for it to be more than just a gimmick that the player needs to be able to legitimately play both the running back and wide receiver positions.

 

In the 16 games before Montgomery started to be used as the running back, Aaron Rodgers only had a passer rating above 100 in one game.  The Packers offense was stagnant.  From the point Montgomery started playing running back, Aaron Rodgers had the best statistics of any quarterback in the league.  Montgomery never got a lot of touches but a player can be valuable to an offense even when the ball isn't in his hands.  Montgomery got most of the work on 1st and 2nd downs during the Packers 6-0 stretch to end the season.  He played in 52% of offensive snaps during that period.  Rodgers had a quarterback rating of 121.0 during that period including 0 interceptions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I'm trying to say is that the Packers ran out of viable RBs last season and in desperation had to throw Montgomery into their backfield.  It wasn't by design or strategy, simply they had no other choice really...having 'any' football player with football skills in the backfield running the ball occasionally is an asset to the offense as it takes away the defense just keying on the QB and receivers. I can't imagine even GB wants to relive what happened last year, let alone some other team try to copy it.  It didn't work very well and was one of the main reasons they didn't make it to the SB.  Aaron Rodgers could take a knee every 1st and 2nd down thru an entire game, and only try to move the ball on 3rd down and the Packers would probably still be in the game in the 4th quarter as he and his receivers are that good.  But then, a few years ago when they had Lacy (an actual RB) in his prime, they were pretty much unstoppable.

 

So sorry if I disagree with your theory, IMHO I just found it pretty funny that what someone would see as a strategy others would see as 'what the f'k are we gonna do now'... 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/26/2017 at 11:09 PM, ABearWithFurniture said:

lol...now I'm intentionally being obtuse.  That's rich...I just found it funny that anyone would call running out of RBs a strategy and would try to emulate it.  I saw it more as the Packers offensive coach went to the weekly RB meeting one week and he was the only one there, and said "ah hell, where are we going to get us some more RBs?" 

Yeah, I don't think it's a viable strategy for other teams. The first few weeks he had had very few RB carries but it grew from there.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

The day after he was drafted the Packers said they liked him for his versatility, he could run and catch the ball and line up all over.

 

My old league gave 1.5PPR, if in that kind of league he may be worth starting.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information