Green Bay Packers Make Mike Montgomery an Offer: "The Good and The Bad"
Reports out of Green Bay today state that the Packers have made a one-year contract offer to their own unrestricted free agent, Mike Montgomery. Montgomery says he is very interested in returning and is considering the Packers' offer.
Other teams have shown interest in Montgomery. He had a visit with the Texans in his hometown of Houston this week, but so far he hasn't received any concrete offers from other teams.
Montgomery is anxious to decide, as he wants to start training in earnest.
"My agent is talking to some other teams and I might have another visit later in the week," Montgomery said. "I want to hurry up and get in an off-season program. I'll make a decision pretty soon."
He had previously not been considered a good fit for the 3-4, where defensive ends need to be heavier than his 270 pounds. But both the Packers and Montgomery feel at 6' 5", his frame can support more weight, which he would have put on to play the position. Montgomery stated that he is currently 275 pounds.
Montgomery has been a steady, if unspectacular backup defensive linemen for the Packers. He had his best season in 2008, ranking second on the defensive line in tackles per snap with one every 7.4.
He's a good run-stopper, but has only recorded five sacks in four years (2.5 in 2008). He's not the most gifted athlete, but always gives a maximum effort. The Packers know him as a quality person, a positive clubhouse guy, and active in charitable endeavors.
Montgomery has had a series of injuries, never remaining healthy through a full season. This move highlights the dire straits the Packers are in on the defensive line. Prospects for a free-agent acquisition are getting dimmer every day. At this point, the Packers are not beyond bringing Montgomery back and hoping for a magical transformation. At worst, they'll have some depth with experience.
Calling all free-agent defensive linemen... Tell your agents to call T.T. and get him off the proverbial pot.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?