sutomcat: Nick Montana Sucks!!!

[dinosaurbbq]

I had a disagreement with Tom about whether Nick Montana was a good QB. As I said in the quote below, I thought he was crap and would be over the course of the season. Tom felt he would be a solid D1 QB and put up good numbers. End of season, so how does Nick Montana look now? As you can tell by the thread title, not good.

Whether Montana is a solid D1 QB as you say and whether he's gonna put up some good numbers this year and next as sutomcat said are generally objective statements that will be resolved for us by the end of the year. I obviously disagree with you both. The reason for my opinion is that he has a history of not playing very well when given the opportunity and I saw some truly awful mechanics in the SU game, which others on here have echoed. If not for Eskridge literally falling down on the long pass, he'd have thrown for 165 yards on 21 completions. He played first at Washington and left because he wasn't good enough to play there. He then went to a community college, Mt. San Antonio in California, where he put up decent numbers against inferior talent. He was offered then by Tulane, Akron and Western Kentucky. Those aren't powerhouses. That is in sharp contrast to his recruitment coming out of high school, when he was offered by powerhouses including Alabama, Georgia, Florida, ND, Ohio State, and Stanford. That shows me that he was felt to have potential in HS a big part of which was likely his name, but ultimately didn't perform up to that potential once he got to college. He will have his chance now against subpar competition in the subpar Conference USA. We will see.

Alright Tom, regular season is over. How was Nick Montana? 153 of 288 for a 53% completion percentage. 1,654 yards passing with 44 rushes for 0 net yards. 14 TD/9INT. 111 QB rating.

How bad is that? 53% completions is very bad. 1,654 yards total offense (passing plus rushing) is pretty bad. 14TD/9INT ratio is not good. 111 QB rating is pretty poor.

In fact, that's worse than Terrel Hunt, who almost everyone on here has expressed for most of the year was simply not an effective D1 QB. I've loved what I've seen out of Hunt as the season went on and I saw him as being pretty effective against BC. The team knew the plays and ran them much better. He started to look off defenders and look to second and even third options on pass plays. He became an effective run weapon, as well. Here are Hunt's numbers:

148 of 244 for 61% completions. Over 60% isn't bad. More important, I think I personally recall at least 30 dropped passes this year that should have been caught, with at least 6-7 being TDs.

1,450 yards passing in 2 less games would extrapolate out over a full season to 1,740 yards passing. That isn't great, but its better than Montana against much better competition. More important, Hunt ran for 426 yards, too. As it was, his 1,876 yards of total offense is significantly better than Montana, but add in the 2 less games and extrapolation and our man Hunt is about 30% more productive than Montana with 2,166 yards of total offense.

10 passing TD/8 INT, but Hunt also ran for 5 TD and 15TD/8INT is better than Nick Montana's numbers.

117 passer rating isn't great, but it again beats Montana.

Tom -- You agree with me now on Nick Montana?

 

[JeremyCuse]

Are you really calling out a board legend over Nick Montana? I'm sure Montana had receivers drop passes just like Hunt, he also played behind what Tulane fans called one of there worst o lines ever and pretty much zero running game. I don't really have an opinion on Montana as a QB but this thread is beyond odd and that's saying something for this board.

 

[Toga]

Are you really calling out a board legend over Nick Montana? I'm sure Montana had receivers drop passes just like Hunt, he also played behind what Tulane fans called one of there worst o lines ever and pretty much zero running game. I don't really have an opinion on Montana as a QB but this thread is beyond odd and that's saying something for this board.

He should meet up with Uncle Tony for that post.

 

[CaliCuse]

I had a disagreement with Tom about whether Nick Montana was a good QB. As I said in the quote below, I thought he was crap and would be over the course of the season. Tom felt he would be a solid D1 QB and put up good numbers. End of season, so how does Nick Montana look now? As you can tell by the thread title, not good.


Alright Tom, regular season is over. How was Nick Montana? 153 of 288 for a 53% completion percentage. 1,654 yards passing with 44 rushes for 0 net yards. 14 TD/9INT. 111 QB rating.

How bad is that? 53% completions is very bad. 1,654 yards total offense (passing plus rushing) is pretty bad. 14TD/9INT ratio is not good. 111 QB rating is pretty poor.

In fact, that's worse than Terrel Hunt, who almost everyone on here has expressed for most of the year was simply not an effective D1 QB. I've loved what I've seen out of Hunt as the season went on and I saw him as being pretty effective against BC. The team knew the plays and ran them much better. He started to look off defenders and look to second and even third options on pass plays. He became an effective run weapon, as well. Here are Hunt's numbers:

148 of 244 for 61% completions. Over 60% isn't bad. More important, I think I personally recall at least 30 dropped passes this year that should have been caught, with at least 6-7 being TDs.

1,450 yards passing in 2 less games would extrapolate out over a full season to 1,740 yards passing. That isn't great, but its better than Montana against much better competition. More important, Hunt ran for 426 yards, too. As it was, his 1,876 yards of total offense is significantly better than Montana, but add in the 2 less games and extrapolation and our man Hunt is about 30% more productive than Montana with 2,166 yards of total offense.

10 passing TD/8 INT, but Hunt also ran for 5 TD and 15TD/8INT is better than Nick Montana's numbers.

117 passer rating isn't great, but it again beats Montana.

Tom -- You agree with me now on Nick Montana?

What is true about Hunt is his improvement as the season went forward. I don't know if that translates to a sure thing next year as the starer but it should be interesting in any event.

 

[Crusty]

I thought we killed Montana but he came back in - one tough kid.

 

[tep624]

I had a disagreement with Tom about whether Nick Montana was a good QB. As I said in the quote below, I thought he was crap and would be over the course of the season. Tom felt he would be a solid D1 QB and put up good numbers. End of season, so how does Nick Montana look now? As you can tell by the thread title, not good.


Alright Tom, regular season is over. How was Nick Montana? 153 of 288 for a 53% completion percentage. 1,654 yards passing with 44 rushes for 0 net yards. 14 TD/9INT. 111 QB rating.

How bad is that? 53% completions is very bad. 1,654 yards total offense (passing plus rushing) is pretty bad. 14TD/9INT ratio is not good. 111 QB rating is pretty poor.

In fact, that's worse than Terrel Hunt, who almost everyone on here has expressed for most of the year was simply not an effective D1 QB. I've loved what I've seen out of Hunt as the season went on and I saw him as being pretty effective against BC. The team knew the plays and ran them much better. He started to look off defenders and look to second and even third options on pass plays. He became an effective run weapon, as well. Here are Hunt's numbers:

148 of 244 for 61% completions. Over 60% isn't bad. More important, I think I personally recall at least 30 dropped passes this year that should have been caught, with at least 6-7 being TDs.

1,450 yards passing in 2 less games would extrapolate out over a full season to 1,740 yards passing. That isn't great, but its better than Montana against much better competition. More important, Hunt ran for 426 yards, too. As it was, his 1,876 yards of total offense is significantly better than Montana, but add in the 2 less games and extrapolation and our man Hunt is about 30% more productive than Montana with 2,166 yards of total offense.

10 passing TD/8 INT, but Hunt also ran for 5 TD and 15TD/8INT is better than Nick Montana's numbers.

117 passer rating isn't great, but it again beats Montana.

Tom -- You agree with me now on Nick Montana?

I'm sure Nick Montana's Offensive Line had nothing to do with his performance. You could have put 5 tackling dummies in front of him and he probably would have fared better.

 

[dasher]

I had a disagreement with Tom about whether Nick Montana was a good QB. As I said in the quote below, I thought he was crap and would be over the course of the season. Tom felt he would be a solid D1 QB and put up good numbers. End of season, so how does Nick Montana look now? As you can tell by the thread title, not good.


Alright Tom, regular season is over. How was Nick Montana? 153 of 288 for a 53% completion percentage. 1,654 yards passing with 44 rushes for 0 net yards. 14 TD/9INT. 111 QB rating.

How bad is that? 53% completions is very bad. 1,654 yards total offense (passing plus rushing) is pretty bad. 14TD/9INT ratio is not good. 111 QB rating is pretty poor.

In fact, that's worse than Terrel Hunt, who almost everyone on here has expressed for most of the year was simply not an effective D1 QB. I've loved what I've seen out of Hunt as the season went on and I saw him as being pretty effective against BC. The team knew the plays and ran them much better. He started to look off defenders and look to second and even third options on pass plays. He became an effective run weapon, as well. Here are Hunt's numbers:

148 of 244 for 61% completions. Over 60% isn't bad. More important, I think I personally recall at least 30 dropped passes this year that should have been caught, with at least 6-7 being TDs.

1,450 yards passing in 2 less games would extrapolate out over a full season to 1,740 yards passing. That isn't great, but its better than Montana against much better competition. More important, Hunt ran for 426 yards, too. As it was, his 1,876 yards of total offense is significantly better than Montana, but add in the 2 less games and extrapolation and our man Hunt is about 30% more productive than Montana with 2,166 yards of total offense.

10 passing TD/8 INT, but Hunt also ran for 5 TD and 15TD/8INT is better than Nick Montana's numbers.

117 passer rating isn't great, but it again beats Montana.

Tom -- You agree with me now on Nick Montana?

First, stats are for losers. Second, to call out the cat over this is bush league. Third, You won't be here long.

 

[Scooch]

I think I speak for many when I say: who *cking cares?

 

[Bayside44]

I think I speak for many when I say: who *cking cares?

Nick Montana cares. Maybe Hannah Montana too.

 

[MadNY3]

Dinosaurbbq,

Thank you for this. I was worried that in case igor suffered dual hand injuries, we did not have a suitable back up for his, err, ridiculous posting ability.

Thanks for giving this board depth!

MadNy3

 

[jekelish]

Wha...er...um...

Wha? I'm so confused by the point of this post. Are we Tulane, or are we playing them again, and no one told me?

 

[Opus]

Nick Montana cares. Maybe Hannah Montana too.

Not sure about Hannah, she is to busy twerking and sticking her tongue out. But I dang sure think Joe cares.

 

[Upstate]

 

[TexanMark]

I nominate the OP with the title "Nick Montana Fan" to replace "Walk On"

 

[dinosaurbbq]

Unexpected responses.
First, who cares? When the post about Nick was made by Tom and I strongly disagreed, I was called out for disagreeing, which I didn't understand. Thus, I was curious at the end of the year to see how Nick ended up and was surprised he was that bad. I wanted to call it to Tom's attention in a hopefully good natured way is all. That checking back to evaluate prognostications thing after the year is over is interesting to me. When I think of it at seasons end, I try to do that. Thanks for the money Vegas for putting SU win total at 4.5, for example.
Second, I don't get the attitude against me for "calling out" a board legend. I enjoy reading Tom's posts on here a lot just as I do many others. He provides great information and thoughts that I wouldn't have otherwise bee aware of. I'm not seeking to banish him from the board here or cause him to lose reputation points or telling him to stop posting or he's stupid or something. I am reminding him that the opinion he expressed a few months ago doesn't seem supported by the stats. Picture it this way-- in September Tom and I disagreed about an assessment of a player or team at an SU tailgate. Next time I see Tom at end of year, I remind him of that disagreement and that I think the stats bore out that I was right and he was wrong. Now picture those of you who have expressed shock or dismay at me "calling him out" standing there frantically flailing your arms and jumping up and down screaming I shouldn't talk to the legend Tom that way. That is what you are doing. If my post was boring and not worthy of caring a whole lot about, which I agree with, your overreactions are just plain funny.

As for the suggestion that I won't be here long, which I take to mean I should leave and am not welcome, or the outright express statements that I shouldn't post anymore, way to go tough guy. I come to this board because I love this team and this school having been a fan now for 42 years, which is my entire life. Many of you have been for longer and many of you have greater access to the program and info about it than I do.

This board can't really afford to and probably shouldn't endeavor to be suggesting people who are fans of this team should not come here or post here or shouldn't be fans of this team. I guess I may or may not be here long. Heck, the board may or may not be here long. But the reaction and the attitude is surprising and disappointing. Much too serious and much too attacking in my view, but I'm not your parents or the arbiter of right and wrong and what the hell do I know anyway. The world will keep rotating around the sun and time will go on. Most important, my favorite team in all of sports, SU Football, will keep playing.

If Tom actually reads this, I hope he understands my post wasn't intended to make him feel bad or "call him out" or suggest he should leave or stop posting, but was instead meant to poke him good naturedly and have some fun and to get his thoughts on the issue actually.

 

[Tobias Funke]

Unexpected responses.
First, who cares? When the post about Nick was made by Tom and I strongly disagreed, I was called out for disagreeing, which I didn't understand. Thus, I was curious at the end of the year to see how Nick ended up and was surprised he was that bad. I wanted to call it to Tom's attention in a hopefully good natured way is all. That checking back to evaluate prognostications thing after the year is over is interesting to me. When I think of it at seasons end, I try to do that. Thanks for the money Vegas for putting SU win total at 4.5, for example.
Second, I don't get the attitude against me for "calling out" a board legend. I enjoy reading Tom's posts on here a lot just as I do many others. He provides great information and thoughts that I wouldn't have otherwise bee aware of. I'm not seeking to banish him from the board here or cause him to lose reputation points or telling him to stop posting or he's stupid or something. I am reminding him that the opinion he expressed a few months ago doesn't seem supported by the stats. Picture it this way-- in September Tom and I disagreed about an assessment of a player or team at an SU tailgate. Next time I see Tom at end of year, I remind him of that disagreement and that I think the stats bore out that I was right and he was wrong. Now picture those of you who have expressed shock or dismay at me "calling him out" standing there frantically flailing your arms and jumping up and down screaming I shouldn't talk to the legend Tom that way. That is what you are doing. If my post was boring and not worthy of caring a whole lot about, which I agree with, your overreactions are just plain funny.

As for the suggestion that I won't be here long, which I take to mean I should leave and am not welcome, or the outright express statements that I shouldn't post anymore, way to go tough guy. I come to this board because I love this team and this school having been a fan now for 42 years, which is my entire life. Many of you have been for longer and many of you have greater access to the program and info about it than I do.

This board can't really afford to and probably shouldn't endeavor to be suggesting people who are fans of this team should not come here or post here or shouldn't be fans of this team. I guess I may or may not be here long. Heck, the board may or may not be here long. But the reaction and the attitude is surprising and disappointing. Much too serious and much too attacking in my view, but I'm not your parents or the arbiter of right and wrong and what the hell do I know anyway. The world will keep rotating around the sun and time will go on. Most important, my favorite team in all of sports, SU Football, will keep playing.

If Tom actually reads this, I hope he understands my post wasn't intended to make him feel bad or "call him out" or suggest he should leave or stop posting, but was instead meant to poke him good naturedly and have some fun and to get his thoughts on the issue actually.

I have to agree. Seems like this post was treated a specific way based on the targeted individual who you had the argument with. I have never met Tom, but he seems like a well liked intelligent fan. He also seems like an adult who can defend himself if he feels that he was wrongly or in appropriately called out.

 

[sutomcat]

Unexpected responses.
First, who cares? When the post about Nick was made by Tom and I strongly disagreed, I was called out for disagreeing, which I didn't understand. Thus, I was curious at the end of the year to see how Nick ended up and was surprised he was that bad. I wanted to call it to Tom's attention in a hopefully good natured way is all. That checking back to evaluate prognostications thing after the year is over is interesting to me. When I think of it at seasons end, I try to do that. Thanks for the money Vegas for putting SU win total at 4.5, for example.
Second, I don't get the attitude against me for "calling out" a board legend. I enjoy reading Tom's posts on here a lot just as I do many others. He provides great information and thoughts that I wouldn't have otherwise bee aware of. I'm not seeking to banish him from the board here or cause him to lose reputation points or telling him to stop posting or he's stupid or something. I am reminding him that the opinion he expressed a few months ago doesn't seem supported by the stats. Picture it this way-- in September Tom and I disagreed about an assessment of a player or team at an SU tailgate. Next time I see Tom at end of year, I remind him of that disagreement and that I think the stats bore out that I was right and he was wrong. Now picture those of you who have expressed shock or dismay at me "calling him out" standing there frantically flailing your arms and jumping up and down screaming I shouldn't talk to the legend Tom that way. That is what you are doing. If my post was boring and not worthy of caring a whole lot about, which I agree with, your overreactions are just plain funny.

As for the suggestion that I won't be here long, which I take to mean I should leave and am not welcome, or the outright express statements that I shouldn't post anymore, way to go tough guy. I come to this board because I love this team and this school having been a fan now for 42 years, which is my entire life. Many of you have been for longer and many of you have greater access to the program and info about it than I do.

This board can't really afford to and probably shouldn't endeavor to be suggesting people who are fans of this team should not come here or post here or shouldn't be fans of this team. I guess I may or may not be here long. Heck, the board may or may not be here long. But the reaction and the attitude is surprising and disappointing. Much too serious and much too attacking in my view, but I'm not your parents or the arbiter of right and wrong and what the hell do I know anyway. The world will keep rotating around the sun and time will go on. Most important, my favorite team in all of sports, SU Football, will keep playing.

If Tom actually reads this, I hope he understands my post wasn't intended to make him feel bad or "call him out" or suggest he should leave or stop posting, but was instead meant to poke him good naturedly and have some fun and to get his thoughts on the issue actually.

I have no problem with you following up on something we disagreed with earlier in the year.

Let me preface this by saying that I am not a Tulane fan, don't even know what conference they play in, but I do know they had a good year (for them anyway), beat bowl bound teams like North Texas and East Carolina, went 7-5 and are playing in the New Orleans Bowl. To me, that is pretty impressive given that they were 2-10 in 2012. I think Nick had something to do with that turnaround.

As others have said, I don't think you can judge a QB based only on statistics. You have to watch the games and see what is happening to make an informed judgement on how a QB is really doing. I only saw Tulane play one game, against Syracuse, but in that game, the Tulane OL was exceptionally bad, and the Tulane WRs were not very impressive either. Despite that, he was able to move the ball consistently, often getting rid of the ball just as he was able to get crushed.

So I think given what he had to work with, his numbers are good, even very good. Looking at his stats, it should be noted that during the 2013 season, he missed two full games with injuries and based on his numbers since he started playing again, I am guessing he played hurt the last 4 games of the season and is still not 100%.

I will agree with you that I expected him to do better than he did the rest of the season after the SU game. I will be interested to see how he does his senior season. I think they play in the ACK next year, don't they?

Nick Montana Game By Game Stats
Season:
Select201320122011
2013 GAME LOGPASSINGRUSHINGQBR
DATEOPPRESULT CMPATTYDSCMP%LNGTDINTRATATTYDSAVGLNGTDRAW QBRADJ QBR
8/29Jackson StateW 34-761414442.94920176.47-1-0.110039.419.2
9/7South AlabamaL 41-39294732761.74531136.95-7-1.411058.853.7
9/12@Louisiana TechW 24-15203623555.63821123.27-18-2.611026.118.0
9/21@SyracuseL 52-17223821357.94511108.4640.716058.262.3
9/28@Louisiana-MonroeW 31-147206535.0261168.84143.5909.17.5
10/5North TexasW 24-21182813264.31910115.78131.613047.243.3
10/12East CarolinaW 36-33 (OT)No statistics available.
10/26TulsaW 14-7No statistics available.
11/2@Florida AtlanticL 34-177227131.8180331.7000.0004.99.6
11/9@UTSAL 10-7183319954.5260293.13-5-1.70058.243.4
11/23UTEPW 45-3121917163.22730190.9100.000--
11/30@RiceL 17-1314319745.2341082.1300.03011.414.3

 

[orangeinohio]

This thread reminds me of this:

 

[IthacaBarrel]

Unexpected responses.
First, who cares? When the post about Nick was made by Tom and I strongly disagreed, I was called out for disagreeing, which I didn't understand. Thus, I was curious at the end of the year to see how Nick ended up and was surprised he was that bad. I wanted to call it to Tom's attention in a hopefully good natured way is all. That checking back to evaluate prognostications thing after the year is over is interesting to me. When I think of it at seasons end, I try to do that. Thanks for the money Vegas for putting SU win total at 4.5, for example.
Second, I don't get the attitude against me for "calling out" a board legend. I enjoy reading Tom's posts on here a lot just as I do many others. He provides great information and thoughts that I wouldn't have otherwise bee aware of. I'm not seeking to banish him from the board here or cause him to lose reputation points or telling him to stop posting or he's stupid or something. I am reminding him that the opinion he expressed a few months ago doesn't seem supported by the stats. Picture it this way-- in September Tom and I disagreed about an assessment of a player or team at an SU tailgate. Next time I see Tom at end of year, I remind him of that disagreement and that I think the stats bore out that I was right and he was wrong. Now picture those of you who have expressed shock or dismay at me "calling him out" standing there frantically flailing your arms and jumping up and down screaming I shouldn't talk to the legend Tom that way. That is what you are doing. If my post was boring and not worthy of caring a whole lot about, which I agree with, your overreactions are just plain funny.

As for the suggestion that I won't be here long, which I take to mean I should leave and am not welcome, or the outright express statements that I shouldn't post anymore, way to go tough guy. I come to this board because I love this team and this school having been a fan now for 42 years, which is my entire life. Many of you have been for longer and many of you have greater access to the program and info about it than I do.

This board can't really afford to and probably shouldn't endeavor to be suggesting people who are fans of this team should not come here or post here or shouldn't be fans of this team. I guess I may or may not be here long. Heck, the board may or may not be here long. But the reaction and the attitude is surprising and disappointing. Much too serious and much too attacking in my view, but I'm not your parents or the arbiter of right and wrong and what the hell do I know anyway. The world will keep rotating around the sun and time will go on. Most important, my favorite team in all of sports, SU Football, will keep playing.

If Tom actually reads this, I hope he understands my post wasn't intended to make him feel bad or "call him out" or suggest he should leave or stop posting, but was instead meant to poke him good naturedly and have some fun and to get his thoughts on the issue actually.

It was your delivery that sucked dude.. go look at the original post and title.. It lacks tact

 

[Millhouse]

fwiw Montana had a slightly better passer rating against FBS and BCS opposition

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

I had a disagreement with Tom about whether Nick Montana was a good QB. As I said in the quote below, I thought he was crap and would be over the course of the season. Tom felt he would be a solid D1 QB and put up good numbers. End of season, so how does Nick Montana look now? As you can tell by the thread title, not good.


Alright Tom, regular season is over. How was Nick Montana? 153 of 288 for a 53% completion percentage. 1,654 yards passing with 44 rushes for 0 net yards. 14 TD/9INT. 111 QB rating.

How bad is that? 53% completions is very bad. 1,654 yards total offense (passing plus rushing) is pretty bad. 14TD/9INT ratio is not good. 111 QB rating is pretty poor.

In fact, that's worse than Terrel Hunt, who almost everyone on here has expressed for most of the year was simply not an effective D1 QB. I've loved what I've seen out of Hunt as the season went on and I saw him as being pretty effective against BC. The team knew the plays and ran them much better. He started to look off defenders and look to second and even third options on pass plays. He became an effective run weapon, as well. Here are Hunt's numbers:

148 of 244 for 61% completions. Over 60% isn't bad. More important, I think I personally recall at least 30 dropped passes this year that should have been caught, with at least 6-7 being TDs.

1,450 yards passing in 2 less games would extrapolate out over a full season to 1,740 yards passing. That isn't great, but its better than Montana against much better competition. More important, Hunt ran for 426 yards, too. As it was, his 1,876 yards of total offense is significantly better than Montana, but add in the 2 less games and extrapolation and our man Hunt is about 30% more productive than Montana with 2,166 yards of total offense.

10 passing TD/8 INT, but Hunt also ran for 5 TD and 15TD/8INT is better than Nick Montana's numbers.

117 passer rating isn't great, but it again beats Montana.

Tom -- You agree with me now on Nick Montana?

Please list each and every of the 30 dropped passes that you "personally recall".
As to Montana, the game I saw the kid was running for his life the whole game. I thought he was pretty good, given his o-line issues.

 

[Millhouse]

It was your delivery that sucked dude.. go look at the original post and title.. It lacks tact

 

[TexanMark]

It was your delivery that sucked dude.. go look at the original post and title.. It lacks tact

Exactly...and most folks were just was having fun with the OP over that...most of us are all guility of typing stuff that reads worse than you intended. It is all good...and yes, tomcat can defend himself...it was just funny that it was brought up nearly 3 months after the game. I hadn't really given two thoughts about Tulane or Montana since then.

 

[dasher]

we had a poster that wrote posts like that a few years ago. He lacked tact and style. Just like you. He isn't here any longer.

 

[JeremyCuse]

Exactly...and most folks were just was having fun with the OP over that...most of us are all guility of typing stuff that reads worse than you intended. It is all good...and yes, tomcat can defend himself...it was just funny that it was brought up nearly 3 months after the game. I hadn't really given two thoughts about Tulane or Montana since then.

Mark nailed it, it was the delivery and the fact that you brought up such an odd topic nearly three months later.