Packers extend an offer to a Free Agent DE

[Zool]

I will agree with Wist about Montgomery. I think he's too tall and smallish to play a 3-4 end spot. He's far too robotic to play OLB.

[bobblehead]

I will agree with Wist about Montgomery. I think he's too tall and smallish to play a 3-4 end spot. He's far too robotic to play OLB.

I will accept the argument he doesn't have the talent, but if he comes in at 290 and can play at that weight he is within the range for a 3-4 DE.

I agree he is not that good and won't amount to anything more than a backup though.

[Lurker64]

At 6-5" hes about the exact height you want in a 3-4 DE. If he can put on some pounds and get a little stouter at the point of attack, he can be a serviceable backup. I agree that I don't expect much out of him, but I've been surprised in the past.

[Patler]

Help me understand this. At 6'5" Mike Montgomery is "too tall" for a DE in the Packers new 3-4 defense, but Canty and Olshanski would have been great additions to sign for the new defense.

Canty is 6'7"
Olshansky is 6'6"

Did we plan on digging little trenches for Canty or Olshansky to play in so they wouldn't be "too tall"? The trench for Montgomery to play in can be much shallower!

[sharpe1027]

Help me understand this. At 6'5" Mike Montgomery is "too tall" for a DE in the Packers new 3-4 defense, but Canty and Olshanski would have been great additions to sign for the new defense.

Canty is 6'7"
Olshansky is 6'6"

Did we plan on digging little trenches for Canty or Olshansky to play in so they wouldn't be "too tall"? The trench for Montgomery to play in can be much shallower!

Trying to find support for a conclusion after-the-fact, rather than reasoning your way to the conclusion, can lead to some strange results.

Monty might suck at 3-4, but he was no shining star in the 4-3. Arguably, a change in defense could help him. Worst case, he is even worse in the 3-4 and gets cut in favor of someone better. Best case, he plays better than some other 3rd string backup.

[Packerarcher]

Why!

What else do you expect from the inept TT.

[wist43]

Don't know where you guys get the idea that someone 6'5" is "ideal" for a 3-4 End???

3-4 ends need to stack at the point of attack and occupy blockers, i.e. more of a 4-3 DT description; hence, everyone else's contention on this board that Harrell is bound for the HOF as a 3-4 end.

Harrell and Jolly are much closer to the body type you're looking for out of a 3-4 end... there are some taller guys playing end in the 3-4 theses days, but they are playing with leverage, and effectively holding the point... which of course is the primary duty of a 3-4 end.

I liked Canty at 3-4 end b/c, despite his being 6'7", he is one stout dude, who can stack the end of the line with the best of 'em, can also get off blocks when the play is there to be made, and can even provide a modicum of pass rush - which is a low priority in a 3-4.

Rangy guys like Montegomery usually have to get it done with speed off the edge. Sans speed??? Hopefully they can fall back on their height, long arms, and technique to help them get the edge. Montegomery simply doesn't have the speed or talent. He looks good getting off the bus, but the guy simply doesn't have the movement skills or strength to excel at much of anything... there's a reason he isn't drawing any interest on the FA market.

[Patler]

Don't know where you guys get the idea that someone 6'5" is "ideal" for a 3-4 End???

3-4 ends need to stack at the point of attack and occupy blockers, i.e. more of a 4-3 DT description; hence, everyone else's contention on this board that Harrell is bound for the HOF as a 3-4 end.

Harrell and Jolly are much closer to the body type you're looking for out of a 3-4 end... there are some taller guys playing end in the 3-4 theses days, but they are playing with leverage, and effectively holding the point... which of course is the primary duty of a 3-4 end.

I liked Canty at 3-4 end b/c, despite his being 6'7", he is one stout dude, who can stack the end of the line with the best of 'em, can also get off blocks when the play is there to be made, and can even provide a modicum of pass rush - which is a low priority in a 3-4.

Rangy guys like Montegomery usually have to get it done with speed off the edge. Sans speed??? Hopefully they can fall back on their height, long arms, and technique to help them get the edge. Montegomery simply doesn't have the speed or talent. He looks good getting off the bus, but the guy simply doesn't have the movement skills or strength to excel at much of anything... there's a reason he isn't drawing any interest on the FA market.

I agree with one point, Montgomery isn't drawing any FA interest because he hasn't been a very good player. He will succeed or fail because of his ability, or lack of ability. It will have nothing to do with being 6'5" as opposed to 6'3" or 6'4".

This fascination the last 5 years or so with "body types" is mostly hogwash. An inch or two difference one way or another, 10 or 15 pounds one way or another for guys this big has minimal impact compared to their athletic ability and feel for the sport. If it did, Canty would never even have been tried at DE in a 3-4 as he is much, much "too tall".

If 6'4" is ideal, 6'5" doesn't make a bit of difference.

[sharpe1027]

Don't know where you guys get the idea that someone 6'5" is "ideal" for a 3-4 End???

3-4 ends need to stack at the point of attack and occupy blockers, i.e. more of a 4-3 DT description; hence, everyone else's contention on this board that Harrell is bound for the HOF as a 3-4 end.

Harrell and Jolly are much closer to the body type you're looking for out of a 3-4 end... there are some taller guys playing end in the 3-4 theses days, but they are playing with leverage, and effectively holding the point... which of course is the primary duty of a 3-4 end.

I liked Canty at 3-4 end b/c, despite his being 6'7", he is one stout dude, who can stack the end of the line with the best of 'em, can also get off blocks when the play is there to be made, and can even provide a modicum of pass rush - which is a low priority in a 3-4.

Rangy guys like Montegomery usually have to get it done with speed off the edge. Sans speed??? Hopefully they can fall back on their height, long arms, and technique to help them get the edge. Montegomery simply doesn't have the speed or talent. He looks good getting off the bus, but the guy simply doesn't have the movement skills or strength to excel at much of anything... there's a reason he isn't drawing any interest on the FA market.

This was the first time anyone said anything about 6' 5" being ideal for anything. *edit* Sorry Wist, I didn't see that post about 6' 5" until just now*edit*

You were the one that characterized Monty as "strictly a 4-3 end," and then tried to explain your position based upon his height and lack of speed. Yet, even your explanation states that speed is not as important in a 3-4 end as it would be in a 4-3 end.

Changing to conversation to be about whether or not Monty will be a good 3-4 end is fine, but nobody said he was good.

I agree he probably won't be a good 3-4 end, but he wasn't a good 4-3 end either and in no way was he "strictly a 4-3 end."

[Lurker64]

Starting 3-4 DEs in the league for the 2008 season:

Pittsburgh Steelers (12-4, won superbowl)
Aaron Smith 6'-5"
Brett Keisel 6'-5"

Baltimore Ravens (11-5, made AFC championship game)
Trevor Pryce 6'-5"
Justin Bannan 6'-3"

Miami Dolphins (11-5, won division)
Kendall Langford 6'-6"
Vonnie Holliday 6'-5"

San Diego Chargers (8-8, won division)
Igor Olshansky 6'-6"
Luis Castillo 6'-3"

New England Patriots (11-5)
Richard Seymour: 6'-6"
Ty Warren 6'-5"

New York Jets (9-7)
Shaun Ellis 6'-5"
Kenyon Coleman 6'-5"

Dallas Cowboys (9-7)
Marcus Spears 6'-4"
Chris Canty 6'-7"

San Francisco 49ers (7-9)
Justin Smith 6'-4"
Ray McDonald 6'-3"

Cleveland Browns (4-12)
Corey Williams 6'-4"
Shaun Smith 6'-2"


So if a guy isn't cut out to be a 3-4 DE because he's taller than 6-4", a lot of teams are doing a lot of things wrong. Note that all of the 3-4 teams who finished the season with a winning record features at least one defensive end who was 6'-5" or taller...

[Joemailman]

I'm not excited about Montgomery, but if he can play effectively at 290, he might have a chance. I've always thought his major weakness was lack of speed off the edge. Well, at DE in a 3-4, he won't be playing the edge, so his greatest weakness is irrelevant.

[wist43]

Why!

No kidding... he's strictly a 4-3 end, and a bad one at that!!!

Unbelievable

With all due respect, you think just about every player on the Packers is strictly a 4-3 player. Yet, most NFL 3-4 players played in a 4-3 defense before playing in the 3-4. You always present a doomsday scenario, from Rodgers last year to every linemen and linebacker this year. What about the Packers do you like?

There's some hope... Rodgers has been light years better than I ever could have hoped for, but he has a long way to go, and a lot to prove.

The OL is still a mess, the LB's are pedestrian, and the front seven in general are miscast AND pedestrian... I don't know why some of you have such a problem with this argument.

The preceeding paragraph, is preached daily on 1250... I disagree with those guys about as much as I do you guys, but it's not as if I'm the only one who sees these things.

As I said, Silverstein wrote an article in JS a couple of weeks ago that I'm sure everyone on here would assume I ghost wrote.

4-12, 8-8, 13-3, and 6-10... I see them as an 8-8 to 10-6 team in perpituity, with little chance of winning it all with the current philosophies in place under TT.

I think TT is a good judge of talent... but, he seems to have a huge blind spot, i.e. team building. If the BPA at every pick is a QB... we're going to end up with 12 QB's... needs be damned. Team building be damned. Need a WR, and you're stacked at DT??? Who's the pick??? Harrell. Need a DT after Harrell busts and TT boots Williams??? And you're reasonably set at WR??? Who's the pick??? Nelson.

Coming off a 13-3 season... of which I would argue that is an aberration and and fluke more than anything else... but, suppose it's not, and the Packers really were contenders last year... what does TT do last season??? No FA help, and a draft class that looks okay, but did nothing to help the team on the field.

If you guys were correct, and the 13-3 season was for real, and the team was on the cusp of a championship - how can you claim that, and at the same time defend TT for doing nothing to put the team over the top last year???

Can't have it both ways. They were 6-10... and for the homers on this board, this may come as a shock to hear, but 6-10 is not a good record.

[Fritz]

My God, Lurk, you've hit on the secret! Get tall defensive ends in a 3-4 and you'll win; get short guys and you'll suck. Hmm...If you get two guys who are, say, 6'-8" will you do even better? Or is it better to have one really tall guy and one kinda tall guy?

Hmmm. I'm surprised Patler or Waldo have not hit on this yet. Perhaps Montgomery is more valuable than we thought...

Seriously (and I like ya, Lurk, just joking around )I wonder if it's the fact that taller guys have longer arms, and it's the long arms at that spot, with that open space, that makes a difference in shedding a blocker and therefore requiring two blockers to occupy the DE. Hmmm.

[wist43]

Don't know where you guys get the idea that someone 6'5" is "ideal" for a 3-4 End???

3-4 ends need to stack at the point of attack and occupy blockers, i.e. more of a 4-3 DT description; hence, everyone else's contention on this board that Harrell is bound for the HOF as a 3-4 end.

Harrell and Jolly are much closer to the body type you're looking for out of a 3-4 end... there are some taller guys playing end in the 3-4 theses days, but they are playing with leverage, and effectively holding the point... which of course is the primary duty of a 3-4 end.

I liked Canty at 3-4 end b/c, despite his being 6'7", he is one stout dude, who can stack the end of the line with the best of 'em, can also get off blocks when the play is there to be made, and can even provide a modicum of pass rush - which is a low priority in a 3-4.

Rangy guys like Montegomery usually have to get it done with speed off the edge. Sans speed??? Hopefully they can fall back on their height, long arms, and technique to help them get the edge. Montegomery simply doesn't have the speed or talent. He looks good getting off the bus, but the guy simply doesn't have the movement skills or strength to excel at much of anything... there's a reason he isn't drawing any interest on the FA market.

I agree with one point, Montgomery isn't drawing any FA interest because he hasn't been a very good player. He will succeed or fail because of his ability, or lack of ability. It will have nothing to do with being 6'5" as opposed to 6'3" or 6'4".

This fascination the last 5 years or so with "body types" is mostly hogwash. An inch or two difference one way or another, 10 or 15 pounds one way or another for guys this big has minimal impact compared to their athletic ability and feel for the sport. If it did, Canty would never even have been tried at DE in a 3-4 as he is much, much "too tall".

If 6'4" is ideal, 6'5" doesn't make a bit of difference.

TT talked a little bit about body type at the combine... said they would be transitioning to different body types. Didn't come right out and differentiate between 3-4/4-3 body types... but they are different.

He did make the comparison of a 4-3 DT to a 3-4 DE, and said they would be grading players differently b/c of the switch.

[Lurker64]

My God, Lurk, you've hit on the secret! Get tall defensive ends in a 3-4 and you'll win; get short guys and you'll suck. Hmm...If you get two guys who are, say, 6'-8" will you do even better? Or is it better to have one really tall guy and one kinda tall guy?

Hmmm. I'm surprised Patler or Waldo have not hit on this yet. Perhaps Montgomery is more valuable than we thought...

Seriously (and I like ya, Lurk, just joking around )I wonder if it's the fact that taller guys have longer arms, and it's the long arms at that spot, with that open space, that makes a difference in shedding a blocker and therefore requiring two blockers to occupy the DE. Hmmm.