The Packers Offense Can Be A Juggernaut

With offseason additions, evolution of veteran players and the continued improvement in younger players, the Green Bay Packers are equipped to reach new heights in production in comparison to the last several seasons.

Due to the situation at running back in 2016, the Packers had to evolve into a new offseason throughout the season. I don’t think the coaches and players get enough credit for this feat.

An offense intended to revolve around Eddie Lacy in the backfield is quite different from one with Ty Montgomery, especially before Ty had much experience at the position. Ty is going to be able to replace what Lacy brought in carrying the ball out of the backfield. He is a powerful player. He is shifty and elusive. He has great vision.

Ty Montgomery will raise the bar at running back this year not only compared to his own performance last season but in comparison to what the Packers have had in a long time at running back through his dual-threat ability.

The Packers are entering the year preparing for an offense that looks more like what they figured out on the fly last season.

At receiver, the emergence of Davante Adams gives the Packers their next star on the perimeter.

As for Jordy Nelson in 2016, the Packers also had to evolve and figure things out as the year went on. Nelson had to grow in confidence after the knee injury. And while he made some big plays on the outside, we saw how effective he was as the Packers began to slide him into the slot more often. Nelson will not be getting over the mental confidence in his knee this year, and the Packers have a more developed sense of where his new strengths are.

I have written previously the Packers’ need for more speed on offense, and I think Trevor Davis (or perhaps finally Jeff Janis?) can emerge as a burner at receiver for the Packers. Maybe the Packers draft someone else in this mold. It seems currently a lot of the Packers receiving threats are technically sound, methodical players. They are smart guys. But, speed threatens defenses and will loosen things up for the pure pass catchers to get open.

Of course much has been written lately about the Packers’ new options at tight end. I have a feeling Lance Kendricks was an athlete buried on a lethargic offense with the Rams, similar to how many viewed Jared Cook when he arrived last year. Kendricks could become a key matchup problem for defenses. Kendricks is not Cook, of course, but the Packers don’t need him to be. He will be a solid option with so much attention being devoted to the top pass catchers. I think Martellus Bennett is an upgrade over Cook and not just a replacement.

I might look at the offensive line with a skeptical eye due to the losses there, but most offensive lines in the league have to work around at least one weaker link. The Packers’ starting five from 2016 isn’t sustainable in the modern cap era. Can we not trust that Ted Thompson will fill that hole at right guard adequately? How did you feel when the starting left tackle was a rookie drafted in the fourth round? I might concede that depth at offensive line has been a problem in seasons past, but you cannot possibly have insurance for every single injury scenario. No team does.

I only need to mention quarterback Aaron Rodgers to say that I don’t need to even mention quarterback Aaron Rodgers in a discussion about how good the offense will be.

The draft hasn’t even happened yet but I feel very confident in this offense as it stands. Am I drinking some offseason Kool-Aid? Maybe a little. And it tastes great. 

NFL Categories: 
0 points

Comments (25)

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

April 09, 2017 at 12:29 pm

"Ty Montgomery will raise the bar at running back this year not only compared to his own performance last season but in comparison to what the Packers have had in a long time at running back through his dual-threat ability."

I think along the same lines as Kevin. I think Montgomery will be very productive this season at RB not only receiving the ball but running it. When you consider what he did last season, learning a completely new position on the fly, one he hasn't played since high school, there's a reason to have lots of optimism about Monty.
A full offseason of training for the position, watching film for the position, and learning the playbook at the position is going to be huge for Montgomery AND the Packers. He's more than big enough to handles the duties of an NFL RB, and I for one can't wait to watch him this year.
Hey, if Ahmad Green thinks he's going to be excellent this season that's good enough for me.

0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

April 09, 2017 at 03:38 pm

*Ahman* Green... :)

0 points
0
0
dblbogey's picture

April 09, 2017 at 07:45 pm

#Amen#.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

April 09, 2017 at 09:26 pm

opps....lol

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

April 10, 2017 at 07:22 am

You know, I don't agree. Eddie Lacy, when healthy and lighter, was a much better runner than Montgomery. A whole different level of power. Better, more natural running vision. Also a better blocker.

This is a drop off, and I think Ted needs to draft a more traditional back. I like Montgomery--a lot--but he really fell off once teams had him scouted last year.

0 points
0
0
chugwater's picture

April 09, 2017 at 12:29 pm

I'm confident the offensive hiccups from 2015 and 2016 are behind us. This offense is built to score, and score often. Just need to stay away from the injury bug.

This team will go as far as the defense takes it. Just need to be above average for a solid chance at another ring. That's why I'd be drafting OLB early and often in a few weeks.

0 points
0
0
porupack's picture

April 09, 2017 at 12:37 pm

I got the TE koolaid, and you're right it is refreshing. Best reason to hope for more O production. Those are 2 impressive additions that will make WRs more productive too. Back in the old days, announcers used to rave about Favre and Rodgers throwing to 8,10 different receivers in a game. That was what made the passing game special. Bennett and Kendricks hopefully get quickly fitting into their assignments.

Wished they kept Lang though. That was becoming a tight Oline.

0 points
0
0
Colin_C's picture

April 09, 2017 at 01:12 pm

Heck, with so many holes on D, just draft all offense and put up 50+ points a game. I'm kidding of course, but like it or not, the O will be our better unit as long as we have 12. I won't be surprised if TT adds some offense early in the draft. Mixon, Samuel, and Feeney are options in the 2nd. Personally, I still want to go mostly D.

0 points
0
0
chugwater's picture

April 09, 2017 at 08:42 pm

As a resident of north Texas, every local fan laughed, shrugged, and/or cried when DAL drafted Zeke last year. Everyone knew their holes were all on defense, but they went offense anyway. Didn't turn out too badly.

Even the 2011 NE Patriots made it within a hair of winning the SB with one of the worst defenses in the league.

Going with your strength is not entirely an insane concept. (Just saying, not advocating.)

0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

April 09, 2017 at 08:50 pm

OK - @ 29 Forrest Lamp G @ 61 Zay Jones WR @ 93 Donta Foreman RB @ 134 Perine RB @ 172 Josh Malone WR @ 182 Amba Etta -Tawo WR @ 212 Tj Logan RB-KR @247 Cory Levin T Chatt.

0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

April 09, 2017 at 02:18 pm

To many ifs. 1. Why is a RB high on our draft list? Why is a Guard Mocked @29. Why is a Wr, a logical choice @61. And what happens if A-rod goes down, and your iffy back-up can't do whats expected. The OFFENSIVE Ifs, are Needs. Needs don't = juggernaut.

0 points
0
0
kevinmooney's picture

April 09, 2017 at 02:26 pm

So based on what you've said, nothing should ever be written, no matter what, projecting the performance of any team, in any sport, at any point in the future....Because all their players might get hurt and you would be wrong.

Sure we need a running back. But it's reasonable to expect Ty to play a majority of the time and be very good. We already have very good pass catchers. And you want to pay big money for a star QB to sit on the bench in case Rodgers goes down? There isn't enough money for all of that.

And I didn't say it's guaranteed. I said, "Can be," and not, "Will be," or, "The stars have perfectly aligned and my palm reader told me so."

0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

April 09, 2017 at 03:49 pm

No, it was based on unstoppable. The more Juggernaut(OFFENSE) gets hyped. The more TT will be a mastermind. We know thats hardly the case. Especially with the ifs as I wrote. Monty has done well. But what Packer RB has gone the whole season without injuries. TT has replaced the guards with less quality, and more Hopes and doubts. Nelson went down. What happened? Ifs = keep your fingers crossed too.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

April 10, 2017 at 06:15 am

I don't think preparing yourself to play WR for 16 games and preparing yourself to be a RB are really the same thing do you? Montgomery is almost 6'1" and 221 pounds. Joe Mixon is about that same size, so are most of the RB in the NFL, even smaller but I'd imagine training for the position would make a huge difference don't you?

Lacy always had ankle problems, Staks could get hit with a snowflake and be out 2 to 4 weeks. Montgomery's biggest obstacle I imagine will be his sickle-cell trait.

I agree with about the Guard position, it's not nearly as good as it was 9 months ago when Sitton and Lang were getting ready for the 2016 season. Last season they I think a good word is fortunate when describing Lane Taylors play opposed to say lucky. But I also thing they knew exactly how much Taylor had progressed and were willing to deal with a slight drop off at the position to save the money and get Sitton out of the locker room because he had been complaining a bit to much for TT taste.
I'm not as calm as our friends here at CHTV. If it's such a easy position to replace then why ever pay Guards the money the Packers were playing Sitton and Lang in the first place? The Packers had a suitable replacement last season and 4 other strong starters. Now they have 3 strong starters, one average Guard, and have lost the best reserve O-Lineman they had. I'm keeping my fingers crossed too because I just don't think it will be that easy the 2nd time around. God forbid they have an injury either because that WILL mean Barclay is coming in.

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

April 10, 2017 at 07:31 am

I tend to agree with Stockholder. This offense still lacks speed, and it needs a pure running back.

Don't be surprised if Ted shocks the world by taking Mixon in Round 1. I'm not calling for it (I want a pass rusher), but I wouldn't complain, either. This kid made one terrible mistake 3 years ago, but his college O-Coordinator predicts he'll be a team captain in the pros.

That's the kind of super-value Ted wants. So don't be surprised. Montgomery fell off badly after a hot start last year, and Mixon's a different level altogether.

0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

April 10, 2017 at 11:05 am

If TT takes Mixon rd 1 or 2. He should be replaced. Mixon broke the girl face in 4 places. If I have a beer bottle and hit some guy in the face. I'm responsible no matter what. And for whatever damages I inflicted. You never hit a woman with force. At all! Thats not self defense. TTs picks in the last few drafts are not about value. There are to many question marks on this roster. I'm against taking another.

0 points
0
0
slit's picture

April 09, 2017 at 02:51 pm

It all comes down to whether or not the Oline can keep #12 upright.

0 points
0
0
mrtundra's picture

April 09, 2017 at 08:08 pm

The number one priority for GBP is to keep ARod healthy.

0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

April 09, 2017 at 03:42 pm

I think the OL will be fine. You can get away with a weak OG, as long as he's not a complete dumpster fire. Depth is lacking in the middle of the OL, so I would not be surprised to see a mid-round pick on that area.

I also think the offense has everything but speed at WR. Trevor Davis can't be counted on just yet. He's an "if." But that is the only discernable weakness I see. Rip isn't as good as Lacy, but he will do. Depth at RB is what is needed.

And heck, the Pats have gotten by at WR for 10 years without a true outside threat. You can run an offense without one. It just helps if you have someone who can take the top off of the defense.

No. It's not the offense I'm worried about. I expect to score 25 a game. It's the defense giving up 31 a game that I'm worried about. Again.

Damn you TT and Capers.

0 points
0
0
Handsback's picture

April 09, 2017 at 04:07 pm

Kevin writes a good possible situation. This isn't an offense that's built around one receiver or a snot-knocking back, it's built around concepts that at this point seem to be fairly deep. If Ty is hurt, they plug in another RB that has strength catching the ball. If they lose a receiver, they throw another guy in to run the routes. Two years ago the offense wasn't capable. MM hadn't developed the depth he needed at WR. Jordy goes down and w/o a TE down the middle or another speed guy, they struggled. Now, if they keep ARod healthy, they have depth in the TE position and enough WRs to keep their system going. They aren't asking Monty to be a Green. Just give them 10-15 carries/catches a game. They will use Rip in short yardage positions because last year he showed how he was capable of moving the stack. Having those two TEs with backup from RRodgers they will make teams play them honest and give Aaron enough time to hit the open receiver.

I see how this could turn out to be a very good year.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

April 09, 2017 at 07:36 pm

Once again the offense will be the strength of the team, good enough to win 10-12 games and make the playoffs. A juggernaut? Maybe, if they remain major injury free. Either way, the offense will be effective and will score. The question will be can the defense carry the team to get an additional win or two during the regular season to improve our playoff seeding and will the defense slow down an opposing playoff offense enough to get us over the hump and into the SB? We'll see. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
mrtundra's picture

April 09, 2017 at 08:14 pm

I see some sites are still saying GB will pick up Adrian Peterson. Why does this talk persist?

0 points
0
0
mrtundra's picture

April 09, 2017 at 08:10 pm

I'm hoping TT drafts 1 or 2 WRs this draft.

0 points
0
0
LayingTheLawe's picture

April 09, 2017 at 08:30 pm

Packerland seems to be vacillating between "Ty Montgomery is going to be a beast" to "what running back are they going to draft or pick up to shore up this weak position". You get whiplash going back and forth between these articles.

0 points
0
0
Spock's picture

April 10, 2017 at 03:05 pm

I tend to agree with "since '61. i.e. "juggernaut? Maybe". I still am surprised at the number of people who don't think Ty could be the starting back. He's as big, or bigger, than many backs out there, is powerful, quick, and instinctive. I think the two tight ends added to this roster will make for some very fun football to watch. MM played tight end and is probably staying up nights already making up plays. Whatever happens with the defense (and I honestly think it will be much improved, if from health if no other reason), I'm excited for this new season to start. I expect this offense to be very, very, good and quite different in looks from previous seasons under MM. Still 17 days until the draft? Sigh.

0 points
0
0