- Oops!Something went wrong.Please try again later.
There have been numerous tweets and questions about whether Ty Montgomery would become eligible at running back in Yahoo Fantasy after getting a chance to line up in the backfield after a rash of injuries for the Green Bay Packers. After much consideration, Yahoo Fantasy Sports has decided to leave Montgomery as receiver only at this time.
We realize many of you will disagree with this, including possibly Aaron Rodgers, but we’re standing by the fact that the Packers haven’t listed Montgomery as a running back on their official depth chart. If and when that happens, we will update his position designation.
Six of our fantasy gurus weighed in with the pitfalls of making the change now. As always, we appreciate your passion, so please feel to tell us why you agree or disagree in the comments section.
Positions can be so blurry in the NFL. It’s not like MLB, where there’s no mistaking a centerfielder or a catcher for anything other than a centerfielder or catcher. In the NFL, running backs and tight ends are constantly split wide, non-quarterbacks often take direct snaps, receivers line up in backfields. Two teams can define positional responsibilities in very different ways. Thus, it makes sense for Yahoo to defer to official team rosters and depth charts for position eligibility.
It’s refreshing our team decided not to grant Montgomery RB eligibility. Arguments can be made with snap percentages and comparisons to other sports, but altering a player’s profile, without clear-cut qualifications, presents a very slippery slope.
Where does the argument end? Should Terrelle Pryor receive a QB tag? Le’Veon Bell WR? With football players shifted around like chess pieces in today’s complex schemes, it’s shrewd to remain vehement against rashness. There’s simply too much gray. I greatly respect our rules consistency.
Due to injuries and depth issues, Green Bay was forced to move receiver Ty Montgomery to the backfield. It’s not a long-term solution for the Packers, and making him eligible at RB leaves many other players’ position eligibility open for interpretation – for example, David Johnson, Theo Riddick, Tevin Coleman and all those other running backs that split out wide regularly during games, suddenly deserve WR eligibility?
Without a stipulation in place based upon the percentage of snaps played at a position, it leaves position eligibility open to all kinds of interpretation based on the wide variety of formations teams employ that often ask a player to fill a role (if only briefly) that is outside his norm.
Dalton Del Don
I’m mostly indifferent to this issue because I can see the argument for both sides, but I do agree it sets a dangerous precedent making such a switch midseason, and it’s unclear right now exactly how Montgomery will be used over the rest of the season. I also get that flexibility helps, but wouldn’t most fantasy owners prefer using a player getting carries out of the wide receiver position anyway?
When (if?) Montgomery is designated as a running back by the Packers then we will have more flexibility to make a midseason change. As players diversify their skill sets and teams become more creative with their personnel’s usage, the definition of each position will continue to evolve. For example, Theo Riddick could be considered a receiver. And Terrell Pryor a quarterback. To avoid sliding down a slippery slope, it’s best to let the teams define their players’ position.
My biggest Montgomery takeaway is this: he should be in your lineup! And it’s also why I like using three WRs and a flex as a standard setup — more players, less flukes, more fun, more players to root for.
I’m glad Yahoo isn’t making some willy-nilly change on Montgomery’s eligibility. When the Packers make the change officially, so will we.