Greg Jennings Injury: Groin Issue Makes WR Fantasy Liability for Rest of Season
Greg Jennings is the most dynamic receiver in the Green Bay Packers' potent offense. The lone game the Packers lost in 2011 was the only game Jennings missed. This year Jennings has been hobbled, and his fantasy value hasn't been there.
Through four weeks, Jennings has missed one game, and he’s only compiled 12 catches for 78 yards and a touchdown.
According to Tom Silverstein of the Sporting News, Jennings is "very doubtful" for the Packers' Week 5 matchup with the Indianapolis Colts. Silverstein also questions if Jennings will be ready to play against the Houston Texans the following week.
It seems like this is going to be a nagging injury all season. The prospects of Jennings becoming a valuable member of your fantasy team aren't high. Even if he returns for the Week 6 game against the Texans, he will likely be less than 100 percent. He may have to play that way for the rest of the year.
Jennings has good hands and he runs crisp routes, but much of what makes him special is his ability to get separation. With a nagging groin issue his mobility will be hindered.
Upon his return I can’t imagine him being Aaron Rodgers' primary downfield target. That role will likely go to Jordy Nelson until Jennings is closer to 100 percent. I’d dump Jennings all together at this point. He’s really just taking up a roster spot, and he’ll never pay the dividends you expected when you selected him.
Right now, he is the definition of a trap player. Fantasy owners may be tempted to keep him because of his name and proven track record. However, that is irrelevant if he isn’t healthy enough to perform at a high level.
Don’t be trapped.
Find a receiver with less of a name who is healthy enough to contribute for the rest of the season.
Follow Brian Mazique and Franchiseplay on YouTube and Twitter for reactions, analysis and news from the world of sports and sports video games.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?