Raiders lead-up

0BobLobLaw0 · Post #1 » by **0BobLobLaw0** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 5:51 pm

Wish this one was at Lambeau so Woodson could get a hero's reception from the crowd.

Getting confidence back.

Win.

27-10

jazzfanWA · Post #2 » by **jazzfanWA** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 6:02 pm

Oak was dominated stat wise by Denver. Hopefully, Shields checks out ok and Montgomery will be ready to go. He brings another dimension to the O.

Post #3 » by **MickeyDavis** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 6:25 pm

Da Raiders had 126 total yards in Denver. They are 2-4 at home this year. The very early weather forecast is party cloudy, 60, light breeze of 8 MPH. O-Line needs to stop holding. Don't really care if Lindsley is back, Tretter has been very good. Hopefully Shields and Montgomery are back and we are all hands on deck.

JackSIKMA43 · Post #4 » by **JackSIKMA43** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 6:29 pm

MickeyDavis wrote:Da Raiders had 126 total yards in Denver. They are 2-4 at home this year. The very early weather forecast is party cloudy, 60, light breeze of 8 MPH. O-Line needs to stop holding. Don't really care if Lindsley is back, Tretter has been very good.

Indeed. When I flew out to Buffalo last year, I had a bad feeling that was going to be a trap game on the road, which proved to be true. I don't feel that way about this game at all. Besides ... the losses to the Lions and Bears this year were two trap games too many, already, I'd say.

jazzfanWA · Post #5 » by **jazzfanWA** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 6:57 pm

MickeyDavis wrote:Da Raiders had 126 total yards in Denver. They are 2-4 at home this year. The very early weather forecast is party cloudy, 60, light breeze of 8 MPH. O-Line needs to stop holding. Don't really care if Lindsley is back, Tretter has been very good. Hopefully Shields and Montgomery are back and we are all hands on deck.

Did you just plagiarize me?

Allanon23 · Post #6 » by **Allanon23** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 7:02 pm

MickeyDavis wrote:Da Raiders had 126 total yards in Denver. They are 2-4 at home this year. The very early weather forecast is party cloudy, 60, light breeze of 8 MPH. O-Line needs to stop holding. Don't really care if Lindsley is back, Tretter has been very good. Hopefully Shields and Montgomery are back and we are all hands on deck.

I'd go a bit farther and say that even if Linsley is healthy, we should go with Tretter. I think he's outperformed Linsley immensely. I saw Tretter get beat badly a few times yesterday, but it wasn't as common as Linsley gets beat.

Profound23 · Post #7 » by **Profound23** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 7:56 pm

What are the odds Woodson gets an INT, fumble recovery, or forced fumble?

Not sure if you guys are paying attention but he is playing at a very high level. Every game I see him make at least one big play when it matters most.

Mags FTW · Post #8 » by **Mags FTW** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 8:04 pm

We need Montgomery back for this home stretch. I'm confident that he's better than every teams 3rd and 4th DB and will bring another wrinkle to the offense.

Flames24Rulz · Post #9 » by **Flames24Rulz** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 8:38 pm

Considering Montgomery went to Stanford, I'm sure he's going to try to do everything he can to finally come back this week.

trwi7 · Post #10 » by **trwi7** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 8:51 pm

Everything I heard during the week was that Montgomery was ready or very close to being ready. Am I crazy for thinking they held him out because of the weather and believing they could beat the Cowboys without him just to give him an extra week in likely better weather?

WiscoKing13 · Post #11 » by **WiscoKing13** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 8:58 pm

trwi7 wrote:Everything I heard during the week was that Montgomery was ready or very close to being ready. Am I crazy for thinking they held him out because of the weather and believing they could beat the Cowboys without him just to give him an extra week in likely better weather?

That's my guess at this point. I hope I'm wrong but all this talk about how Montgomery is going to come in and spark the offense IMO is a little short sighted. He played in 5 games, most catches was 4 and had a total of 136 yards(long of 31).

I just don't see how a guy like Abby who we're all told Rodgers trust/loves can barley see the field, how is Montgomery going to?

crkone · Post #12 » by **crkone** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 9:30 pm

Montgomery also can't really stretch the field. He can with his speed but isn't really refined at WR. His knock coming out was his drops and his bad route running. He has issues high-pointing, catching over the shoulder, and locating the ball. He's a beast within 5-10 yards of scrimmage though.

Mags FTW · Post #13 » by **Mags FTW** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 10:04 pm

WiscoKing13 wrote:I just don't see how a guy like Abby who we're all told Rodgers trust/loves can barley see the field, how is Montgomery going to?

Rodgers likes Ty too, and I thought he was essentially a starter in the Rams game when Adams was out.

trwi7 wrote:Everything I heard during the week was that Montgomery was ready or very close to being ready. Am I crazy for thinking they held him out because of the weather and believing they could beat the Cowboys without him just to give him an extra week in likely better weather?

I heard they were "playing it safe" and yes I bet the wet grass had something to do with it.

Marley2Hendrix · Post #14 » by **Marley2Hendrix** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 10:41 pm

Mags FTW wrote:
WiscoKing13 wrote:I just don't see how a guy like Abby who we're all told Rodgers trust/loves can barley see the field, how is Montgomery going to?

Rodgers likes Ty too, and I thought he was essentially a starter in the Rams game when Adams was out.

Ditto. It looked to me like there was an emphasis on to integrate and, to some extent, feature Ty on offense (weren't we seeing Ty/Randall backfields?). I think the coaching staff is far more excited about getting Ty involved then they ever have been for Abby. Ty coming back can only mean good things. I'm excited, count me in as being on his hype train.

Iheartfootball · Post #15 » by **Iheartfootball** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 11:33 pm

Kind of surprised at the level of confidence. I get that it's the Raiders but they are ascending. Very good QB, good WR's, Oline. And on defense the have Khalil Mack. Who just had 5 sacks.

I think it's going to be closer than everyone thinks.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Mags FTW · Post #16 » by **Mags FTW** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 12:44 am

Marley2Hendrix wrote:
Mags FTW wrote:
WiscoKing13 wrote:I just don't see how a guy like Abby who we're all told Rodgers trust/loves can barley see the field, how is Montgomery going to?

Rodgers likes Ty too, and I thought he was essentially a starter in the Rams game when Adams was out.

Ditto. It looked to me like there was an emphasis on to integrate and, to some extent, feature Ty on offense (weren't we seeing Ty/Randall backfields?). I think the coaching staff is far more excited about getting Ty involved then they ever have been for Abby. Ty coming back can only mean good things. I'm excited, count me in as being on his hype train.

Yup. In his last 2 full games he had 11 targets. Aaron definitely isn't afraid to throw it to him.

RiotPunch · Post #17 » by **RiotPunch** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 1:46 am

Exciting to see what MM has drawn up for Monty. Although, it would be nice to unleash him vs. Arizona so they have little to no scouting material to gameplan for him.

HKPackFan · Post #18 » by **HKPackFan** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 2:54 am

trwi7 wrote:Everything I heard during the week was that Montgomery was ready or very close to being ready. Am I crazy for thinking they held him out because of the weather and believing they could beat the Cowboys without him just to give him an extra week in likely better weather?

Actually I heard it was because they needed the extra oline. The entire oline needed backups so they deactivated some of the skill guys.

I also think Tretter is a better run blocker then Corey.

HKPackFan · Post #19 » by **HKPackFan** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 3:00 am

Profound23 wrote:What are the odds Woodson gets an INT, fumble recovery, or forced fumble?

Not sure if you guys are paying attention but he is playing at a very high level. Every game I see him make at least one big play when it matters most.

One of my favorite all time nfl players. He must be a damn vampire to be able to do what he's doing right now. It's not even possible.

Are the police checking the correlation between homicide victims with all their blood drained the night before a raiders game in each city? How can he continue to play well at that age????

thomchatt3rton · Post #20 » by **thomchatt3rton** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 3:04 am

WiscoKing13 wrote:
trwi7 wrote:Everything I heard during the week was that Montgomery was ready or very close to being ready. Am I crazy for thinking they held him out because of the weather and believing they could beat the Cowboys without him just to give him an extra week in likely better weather?

That's my guess at this point. I hope I'm wrong but all this talk about how Montgomery is going to come in and spark the offense IMO is a little short sighted. He played in 5 games, most catches was 4 and had a total of 136 yards(long of 31).

I just don't see how a guy like Abby who we're all told Rodgers trust/loves can barley see the field, how is Montgomery going to?

Trwi7- I thought pretty much the exact same things, actually.
It sure seems like the Packers are conservative with injuries- like way more than other teams. I guess thats one of the luxuries of having a HOF-level QB- you can afford to be conservative like that. It does seem crazy to hold out a WR when your passing game has been struggling, but I could totally see MM doing it.

Wisco- I've been pretty vocal about how the return of Quarless and Montgomery could really help this offense.
It's not because of what they are individually, but because any single improvement in the WR corps makes the rest of the WR corps better.
The whole is more than the sum of its parts.
Even if Ty only catches 5 balls for 40 yards in a game, that probably means Cobb, JJ, etc are going to have better days too. I could be overrating this argument, but I'm confident that its true to some extent or other.

Also, the addition of Ty and Quarless allows you to do more things from a formation point of view (esp AQ) opening up the playbook and juicing the offense (we hope). For some reason, they don't use Perillo for any 2TE sets (not that I've noticed) but they will with Quarless. It's a big part of our offense, and its been missing for a long time.
Plus, Ty just gives you more ammo for 4 or 5 wide sets, we saw him in the backfield in some creative ways in that hurry-up package earlier this year, etc etc.

When I think back to how the O was capable of playing early this year with AQ and Ty, versus how we've played without them, it seems clear to me they should be a boost. They won't make us forget Jordy or anything, but they ought to help.