Mike Montgomery is da Man!

[LL2]

Mike Montgomery had 10 tackles, a sack and a deflected pass. TT once again proves who is the genius. Montgomery should've started over Thompson. Hopefully Montgomery can become the other pass rushing threat we need to compliment Kampy.

[Partial]

I disagree. I just don't see it with Monty. He had his first career sack yesterday when he was left completely unblocked. Big whoop. The ten tackles are solid, but not unexpected with how much they ran the ball and short passes. I don't think he's a very good player.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I disagree. I just don't see it with Monty. He had his first career sack yesterday when he was left completely unblocked. Big whoop. The ten tackles are solid, but not unexpected with how much they ran the ball and short passes. I don't think he's a very good player.

He had a good game against a good OL. Give him credit. He wasn't left unblocked either, but it was poor blocking. However, he'll have to do it for more than one game for me to get excited.

[Partial]

I disagree. I just don't see it with Monty. He had his first career sack yesterday when he was left completely unblocked. Big whoop. The ten tackles are solid, but not unexpected with how much they ran the ball and short passes. I don't think he's a very good player.

He had a good game against a good OL. Give him credit. He wasn't left unblocked either, but it was poor blocking. However, he'll have to do it for more than one game for me to get excited.

I suppose I'm in the same boat with slightly more negativity. I like the length and stature of the rook. I think he has the physique to develop into a very good player. I'm much higher on him.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Montgomery looks like a different player from what we saw in previous years. He looks quicker.

Colin Cole certainly has progressed too.

[Patler]

I disagree. I just don't see it with Monty. He had his first career sack yesterday when he was left completely unblocked. .

Give the guy SOME credit, it wasn't his first career sack, just the first this season. He had 2.5 coming into the season! :lol:

To be fair, he has never really played an awful lot.

[LL2]

I disagree. I just don't see it with Monty. He had his first career sack yesterday when he was left completely unblocked. Big whoop. The ten tackles are solid, but not unexpected with how much they ran the ball and short passes. I don't think he's a very good player.

He had a good game against a good OL. Give him credit. He wasn't left unblocked either, but it was poor blocking. However, he'll have to do it for more than one game for me to get excited.

Good point. I think the future is bright for the defense. The Pack finally have good up and coming players in the secondary (Rouse, T-Will, Blackmon). Montgomery can get better. It will take a couple years to see what Thompson can do. Chillar looked decent.

[SkinBasket]

I disagree. I just don't see it with Monty. He had his first career sack yesterday when he was left completely unblocked. Big whoop. The ten tackles are solid, but not unexpected with how much they ran the ball and short passes. I don't think he's a very good player.

Uh oh. Partial refuses to label Montgomery as having his ethereal "it." He may as well retire now. Goodness knows football players never develop over the years. Yeah, you can make the argument we haven't seen enough to get excited, but that also means we haven't seen enough to shit all over his performance.

[mraynrand]

The Packer defense basically allowed 13 points in regulation to the Titans. 3 from the turnover in FG range and 3 in OT. IF your defense allows 13 points, your offense is the reason you lost the game. It's OK to critique this guy and that guy on the defense as having a good or bad game, but collectively the defense was outstanding yesterday. Too bad they couldn't seal the deal with one of the missed opportunities for turnovers - or missed opportunities for scores on offense (see Patler's what if thread....)

[Partial]

I disagree. I just don't see it with Monty. He had his first career sack yesterday when he was left completely unblocked. Big whoop. The ten tackles are solid, but not unexpected with how much they ran the ball and short passes. I don't think he's a very good player.

Uh oh. Partial refuses to label Montgomery as having his ethereal "it." He may as well retire now. Goodness knows football players never develop over the years. Yeah, you can make the argument we haven't seen enough to get excited, but that also means we haven't seen enough to shit all over his performance.

He's had 4 years to distinguish himself and prove to be worth keeping on the roster. At what point do you draw the line?

He was a 7th round pick if I remember correctly. I'd say he has done quite well for himself to stick around this long, and might have maxed out. I'd like to see them go ahead with someone else next year as I don't think Monty will ever be more than he is now.

[SkinBasket]

He's had 4 years to distinguish himself and prove to be worth keeping on the roster. At what point do you draw the line?

You can also look at it as him having several years to develop and learn behind some quality linemen. If there was a line to be drawn, I'm sure the coaching staff would have done so already at some point during his career.

D linemen don't just come out of college and dominate. There's a lot to learn about technique for most guys who got by on size and athleticism through college and in a lot of cases, a lot of body strength, not just fat, to build up. I would say he's in his sweet spot for development of a 6th round pick. 3-5 years.

There's no reason to think that now he's getting an opportunity, that yesterday wasn't an example of what he could do on a regular basis and that he could be a solid starter.

I don't buy this whole Madden rating "maxing out" business either. Why not use yesterday of an example of where he's maxed out? Where's his 99 rating?

[texaspackerbacker]

I always liked Montgomery and was hoping he wouldn't be a victim of numbers in cuts the past couple of years.

His biggest problem was being dogged by injuries. If he stays healthy and gets the playing time, I think he can approach the quality that Kampman has given us.

BTW, Thompson didn't look bad out there either. I'm glad KGB is gone.

[BZnDallas]

He's had 4 years to distinguish himself and prove to be worth keeping on the roster. At what point do you draw the line?

He was a 7th round pick if I remember correctly. I'd say he has done quite well for himself to stick around this long, and might have maxed out. I'd like to see them go ahead with someone else next year as I don't think Monty will ever be more than he is now.[/quote]


i agree, how long did it take Donald Driver?

[Partial]

He's had 4 years to distinguish himself and prove to be worth keeping on the roster. At what point do you draw the line?

You can also look at it as him having several years to develop and learn behind some quality linemen. If there was a line to be drawn, I'm sure the coaching staff would have done so already at some point during his career.

D linemen don't just come out of college and dominate. There's a lot to learn about technique for most guys who got by on size and athleticism through college and in a lot of cases, a lot of body strength, not just fat, to build up. I would say he's in his sweet spot for development of a 6th round pick. 3-5 years.

There's no reason to think that now he's getting an opportunity, that yesterday wasn't an example of what he could do on a regular basis and that he could be a solid starter.

I don't buy this whole Madden rating "maxing out" business either. Why not use yesterday of an example of where he's maxed out? Where's his 99 rating?

Dude, he played OK at best yesterday. Let's not forget our run defense was gashed for 230+ yards.

[Partial]

He's had 4 years to distinguish himself and prove to be worth keeping on the roster. At what point do you draw the line?

He was a 7th round pick if I remember correctly. I'd say he has done quite well for himself to stick around this long, and might have maxed out. I'd like to see them go ahead with someone else next year as I don't think Monty will ever be more than he is now.


i agree, how long did it take Donald Driver?[/quote]

Driver put up a solid 2nd season, a down 3rd year, and took off into a stud from there. Monty is on his 4th year and hasn't shown a darn thing. I'm not seeing the comparison.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Driver put up a solid 2nd season, a down 3rd year, and took off into a stud from there. Monty is on his 4th year and hasn't shown a darn thing. I'm not seeing the comparison.

We gave up 178 yards rushing.

Driver was drafted in 1999

1999 = 3 receptions
2000 = 21 receptions
2001 = 13 receptions

2002 was his 4th year. That's when he took off.

[Partial]

He started several games and was the 3rd receiver in his second year. That is far better than Monty has done in 4 years.

Sorry about the rushing, I was adding up all of the rook's yards, passing included. Regardless, awful!

[BZnDallas]

He's had 4 years to distinguish himself and prove to be worth keeping on the roster. At what point do you draw the line?

He was a 7th round pick if I remember correctly. I'd say he has done quite well for himself to stick around this long, and might have maxed out. I'd like to see them go ahead with someone else next year as I don't think Monty will ever be more than he is now.


i agree, how long did it take Donald Driver?

Driver put up a solid 2nd season, a down 3rd year, and took off into a stud from there. Monty is on his 4th year and hasn't shown a darn thing. I'm not seeing the comparison.[/quote]


where are you getting your info??

http://www.packers.com/team/players/driver_donald/#s14

first 3 years 37 receptions for a lil over 500 yards... his 4th year 70 recpetions for over 1000 yards...

try comparing again!

[Patler]

Sorry about the rushing, I was adding up all of the rook's yards, passing included. Regardless, awful!

Not really when you consider 54 yards came on one carry. Apart from that the Titans had 124 yards on 35 carries. Not great, but not awful defense either.

[Tarlam!]

I saw his post-game interview. He may be a player, but he's as dumb as a box of rocks. Do players qualify for speach therapy at some point?

[Patler]

He started several games and was the 3rd receiver in his second year. That is far better than Monty has done in 4 years.

Sorry about the rushing, I was adding up all of the rook's yards, passing included. Regardless, awful!

Driver started a couple games due to injuries in each his second and third seasons, but wasn't even the #3 receiver his third season, playing behind Freeman, Schroeder and Bradford. He really was a non factor until his fourth season, when the others all left in one off season. No one expected much out of Driver either, he just sort of came out of no where that season. They went into the season expecting Terry Glenn to be the guy, and no one really knew who the second starter would be during the off season.

[Gunakor]

He's had 4 years to distinguish himself and prove to be worth keeping on the roster. At what point do you draw the line?

You can also look at it as him having several years to develop and learn behind some quality linemen. If there was a line to be drawn, I'm sure the coaching staff would have done so already at some point during his career.

D linemen don't just come out of college and dominate. There's a lot to learn about technique for most guys who got by on size and athleticism through college and in a lot of cases, a lot of body strength, not just fat, to build up. I would say he's in his sweet spot for development of a 6th round pick. 3-5 years.

There's no reason to think that now he's getting an opportunity, that yesterday wasn't an example of what he could do on a regular basis and that he could be a solid starter.

I don't buy this whole Madden rating "maxing out" business either. Why not use yesterday of an example of where he's maxed out? Where's his 99 rating?

Dude, he played OK at best yesterday. Let's not forget our run defense was gashed for 230+ yards.

With a few exceptions, I thought our run defense was terrific yesterday. There was a lot of yards, but the Titans run the ball often. 50 something yards came on just one play, so when you figure 32 or 33 rushes for 100 yards or so it really isn't that bad.

[SkinBasket]

Dude, he played OK at best yesterday. Let's not forget our run defense was gashed for 230+ yards.

I see this comment's already been addressed pretty thoroughly so I'll just add this:

You think 10 Tackles, 8 solo, a sack, and a PD is OK? What more do you want from a D lineman in one game? Pinning the entirety of their rushing yards on his performance isn't exactly fair either on a day when our LBs and Bigby played the run like shit. He can only be in one spot on the field after all. In that one spot, he made about as big an impact as he could have.

[Zool]

Dude, he played OK at best yesterday. Let's not forget our run defense was gashed for 230+ yards.

Some day I'll figure out why you throw out random stats to attempt an argument. Not any day soon I bet

Team 36 178 4.9

[SkinBasket]

Dude, he played OK at best yesterday. Let's not forget our run defense was gashed for 230+ yards.

Some day I'll figure out why you throw out random stats to attempt an argument. Not any day soon I bet

Team 36 178 4.9

Random and incorrect stats? I think he's trying out the PackerBlues method of argument, but needs work since his stat was at least tangentially related to the argument, even if it wasn't right. If he had blamed Montgomery, and by association Ted Thompson, for our yards lost on sacks, he would have been there.

[Partial]

Dude, he played OK at best yesterday. Let's not forget our run defense was gashed for 230+ yards.

I see this comment's already been addressed pretty thoroughly so I'll just add this:

You think 10 Tackles, 8 solo, a sack, and a PD is OK? What more do you want from a D lineman in one game? Pinning the entirety of their rushing yards on his performance isn't exactly fair either on a day when our LBs and Bigby played the run like shit. He can only be in one spot on the field after all. In that one spot, he made about as big an impact as he could have.

Stop looking at that stat sheet and start watching the film...

The sack... unblocked, just like the Pack did to Kearse on the first play from scrimmage.

Where were the tackles 5-8 yards down the field?

We were GASHED on the run in a legendary poor performance. How can you give this guy kudos for that?

[Partial]

Dude, he played OK at best yesterday. Let's not forget our run defense was gashed for 230+ yards.

Some day I'll figure out why you throw out random stats to attempt an argument. Not any day soon I bet

Team 36 178 4.9

Dude, I pulled it from JSO as combined yards for White and the rookie. STFU with that bullshit. I was pulling numbers quickly. I don't have time for a thorough statistical analysis. I'm too busy coming up with the next fake stat to drop in casual convo.

[Zool]

Dude, he played OK at best yesterday. Let's not forget our run defense was gashed for 230+ yards.

Some day I'll figure out why you throw out random stats to attempt an argument. Not any day soon I bet

Team 36 178 4.9

Dude, I pulled it from JSO as combined yards for White and the rookie. STFU with that bullshit. I was pulling numbers quickly. I don't have time for a thorough statistical analysis. I'm too busy coming up with the next fake stat to drop in casual convo.

Whatever makes you happy fancy boy.

[SkinBasket]

Dude, he played OK at best yesterday. Let's not forget our run defense was gashed for 230+ yards.

I see this comment's already been addressed pretty thoroughly so I'll just add this:

You think 10 Tackles, 8 solo, a sack, and a PD is OK? What more do you want from a D lineman in one game? Pinning the entirety of their rushing yards on his performance isn't exactly fair either on a day when our LBs and Bigby played the run like shit. He can only be in one spot on the field after all. In that one spot, he made about as big an impact as he could have.

Stop looking at that stat sheet and start watching the film...

The sack... unblocked, just like the Pack did to Kearse on the first play from scrimmage.

Where were the tackles 5-8 yards down the field?

We were GASHED on the run in a legendary poor performance. How can you give this guy kudos for that?


Gashed? Legendary? What? While you're busy studying the film, make a note that there are 11 gentlemen playing defense and that only one of them can be Montgomery at any given time.

You're getting a little desperate and silly in your singular effort to prove your point that Montgomery doesn't possess Partial's Magical Seal of Greatness.

[Patler]

Stop looking at that stat sheet and start watching the film...

The sack... unblocked, just like the Pack did to Kearse on the first play from scrimmage.

Where were the tackles 5-8 yards down the field?

We were GASHED on the run in a legendary poor performance. How can you give this guy kudos for that?

Actually, the stat sheet can be very informative when discussing a specific player's performance. especially the play-by-play summary. Not including the sack for -7, according to the "stat sheet" the Titans gained a total of 25 yards on the plays in which Montgomery had a tackle.

Decent performance by Montgomery on those plays. What it does not tell us is the times he was responsible for longer plays for which he did not have the tackle. However, excluding the one long run of 54 yards (for which Thompson was on the field, not Montgomery), 35 carries for 124 yards is not really being "gashed".

The big problem was that the D caved on the last two possessions by the Titans.

[Bossman641]

Stop looking at that stat sheet and start watching the film...

The sack... unblocked, just like the Pack did to Kearse on the first play from scrimmage.

Where were the tackles 5-8 yards down the field?

We were GASHED on the run in a legendary poor performance. How can you give this guy kudos for that?

Actually, the stat sheet can be very informative when discussing a specific player's performance. especially the play-by-play summary. Not including the sack for -7, according to the "stat sheet" the Titans gained a total of 25 yards on the plays in which Montgomery had a tackle.

Decent performance by Montgomery on those plays. What it does not tell us is the times he was responsible for longer plays for which he did not have the tackle. However, excluding the one long run of 54 yards (for which Thompson was on the field, not Montgomery), 35 carries for 124 yards is not really being "gashed".

The big problem was that the D caved on the last two possessions by the Titans.

Agreed, with the exception of the one long burst by White I thought the defense played pretty well. A team that runs the ball as much as the Titans is gonna get yards. It wasn't like the Atlanta game where they were able to run for 5 yards every play.

That one long run really made the defense look a lot worse than they actualy were against the run IMO. Coincidentally, this is also what is holding Grant's average back so much. We have no long runs at all, other than Game 1 against the Vikings. It'd be nice to seehim break a 40 yarder.

[Gunakor]

Stop looking at that stat sheet and start watching the film...

The sack... unblocked, just like the Pack did to Kearse on the first play from scrimmage.

Where were the tackles 5-8 yards down the field?

We were GASHED on the run in a legendary poor performance. How can you give this guy kudos for that?

Actually, the stat sheet can be very informative when discussing a specific player's performance. especially the play-by-play summary. Not including the sack for -7, according to the "stat sheet" the Titans gained a total of 25 yards on the plays in which Montgomery had a tackle.

Decent performance by Montgomery on those plays. What it does not tell us is the times he was responsible for longer plays for which he did not have the tackle. However, excluding the one long run of 54 yards (for which Thompson was on the field, not Montgomery), 35 carries for 124 yards is not really being "gashed".

The big problem was that the D caved on the last two possessions by the Titans.

Agreed, with the exception of the one long burst by White I thought the defense played pretty well. A team that runs the ball as much as the Titans is gonna get yards. It wasn't like the Atlanta game where they were able to run for 5 yards every play.

That one long run really made the defense look a lot worse than they actualy were against the run IMO. Coincidentally, this is also what is holding Grant's average back so much. We have no long runs at all, other than Game 1 against the Vikings. It'd be nice to seehim break a 40 yarder.

I have absolutely no problems with Grant if he consistently gets 4 yards per carry, thus moving the chains and chewing up clock. In most cases, I'd rather see a time consuming 15+ play TD drive than a single 60 yard TD run. I'd rather wear the opposing defense out while ours is rested.

[bobblehead]

since the other errors got corrected....MM was a 6th, not a 7th. AS was jolly...and tom brady.

I was high in MM hoping he would stay healthy and look good, but I have to agree with one thing....ONE game doesn't give me a chubby.

[SnakeLH2006]

I like Mike Mont. but did no one else see the HUGE blown plays (I watch on and HD-DVR to see the whole game and replay most plays) he made early on.

I think he gets better with experience and played well last week, but got goddamn smoked on some HUGE running plays as the contain DE in the first few games where he had a chance to play.

Snake's Take:

MM will be pretty good maybe, he's gonna be an UFA this year (playing for a new deal...hopefully nothing insane), but has much to prove like KGB always had to...can he stop the run. NOPE. Is he a good pass-rusher at the same size, yes, he's above average. He needs to maintain consistency. But that comes with reps.