Ty Goes to the Runner

Posted by  J.R. Augustine   in  ,      2 years ago     88 Views     Leave your thoughts  

FireFan: Download the app, use the code GetTheRing, Join the PackerNation league

Ty Montgomery Kick ReturnsWatching the Packers beat the Bears is always a thrill. But what excited me most was the production that Ty Montgomery had. When the Packers drafted Montgomery there was a lot of speculation that they selected him primarily to return kicks. I was one of those people. He looked so fluid in his college film. So much north and south with just enough adjustments to hit seams.

Then the Packer preseason hit.

Most Dangerous Substance on Earth - Packer Offense

Throughout the preseason Montgomery looked… off. He didn’t look bad, he just didn’t look like he was as able to read the blocks and find the same seams he located in college. Some of that, I chalked up to the fact that the majority of his blockers were young guys who were new to the position. But, some of his lack of preseason production was just slow reactions.

However, it looks like the move to the regular season and, with it, regular blockers has made a world of difference. Not once did the Packers start shy of the 20 yard line and he consistently put the offense in great field position.

More than that though, I get the impression that Ty was just one or two reads from breaking it for six. As he gets more and more comfortable with the return role we’re going to eventually see him light it up.

If the guys keep blocking like that and Montgomery can really settle down into his role, then half of the special teams woes will be cared for.

I really don’t expect the Seahawks to give Ty many opportunities in week 2. They’ll probably try to kick everything out of the back of the endzone and be content to let the Packers start at the 20. But, if they do make the mistake of putting the ball in Montgomery’s hands… watch out. The roar at Lambeau Field might be measurable on the Richter scale.

About  

Brady Augustine is co-owner and content creator for www.greenbaypackernation.com. He currently resides in Tennessee and also conspires with brother, JR on www.cheesnewswire.com

3 Comments

  1.   January 8, 2016, 4:25 pm

    Realistically, Washington hasn’t beaten a team with a winning record all season. I may be underestimating their talent, but my opinion is that they’re the weakest playoff team of both conferences. Their offense is decent, especially if Cousins is allowed to get into a rhythm and they have serious speed at WR. Their front 4 on D is good, but their secondary is full of holes.

    If Rodgers is to get on a roll, this is the team to do it against. Our passing game has responded well late in games against much better Ds than this with no run game. I still think we’ll struggle to run the ball with a banged up O-line and Lacy’s sore ribs. I would never suggest we don’t run at all, but running on 1st and 2nd down and consecutive 1st downs has hurt us all year long. I’d like to see a 75/25 pass/run ratio – including a few runs by Rodgers.

    So my best guess is that it comes down to 5 keys:
    Consistent pressure on Cousins
    Turnovers
    McCarthy’s play calling getting Rodgers into rhythm early with some timing routes and screens to RBs
    Not calling too many run plays which plays to the strength of Redskins’ D
    Rodgers playing well.

    I didn’t list our O-line playing well because Rodgers can overcome most of that when performing like he’s capable, and frankly, I’d prefer to see him tuck it and run to slow down the pass rush a bit. Go Pack go!

  2.   January 8, 2016, 3:12 pm

    Your dreaming if you think they are able to run the ball…….
    They don’t need bounces just a swift kick in the butt to Mc Carthy the play caller( joke)

    •   January 8, 2016, 3:42 pm

      You could be right Bill…I may be dreaming. But I think a bounce or two our way is more likely than anyone giving McCarthy a swift kick in the butt. At this point, I would be content to see some consistent individual wins that add up to an extended drive. 😀

Leave a Reply

You can use these tags:   <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>