Do We Need More Than 11 OL's?

Discussion in ' - Patriots Fan Forum' started by mgteich, Aug 28, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. mgteich

    mgteich Veteran Supporter

    Could we go with 8 OL's on the 53 and 3-4 on the Practice Squad? Ghiaciuc (or a free agent)would be our #9, but do we need a #9? None of the 8 are developmental players. All are ready start if need be.

    Starters: Light, Connolly, Koppen, Neal, Vollmer
    Game Day Backups: LeVoir, Wendell
    Inactive Backup Ojinnaka (he can backup at both OT and OG)
    Practice Squad Larsen, Bussey, Ohrnberger, Welch (one might not make it through)
  2. jmt57

    jmt57 Moderator Staff Member Supporter

    There are only eight spots on the Practice Squad. It serves no purpose to have half of those slots go to one unit (the offensive line.)

    I would guess the Pats break it up as one QB (only two on the roster), two OL, two DL, a LB, a DB, and a WR or TE.
  3. mgteich

    mgteich Veteran Supporter

    I would keep 3 OL's on the Practice Squad, especially if carrying 3 on the Practice Squad would allow me to keep only 8 on the total roster. As Belichick says, we have a 61 man roster.

    QB - saves a roster spot, although it is an inactive roster spot
    OL - the single best use of the PS for development of players 3 players are my choice
    DL -We usually keep a couple in the hope of development: Deaderick is clear
    LB Fletcher
    TE Myers
    WR/DB I don't see anyone I'd keep

  4. Box_O_Rocks

    Box_O_Rocks Supporter Supporter

    NE needs 5 starters: Light, Connolly, Koppen, Neal, Vollmer

    Dante/BB usually keep...
    - 2 reserve OT: LeVoir, Ojinnaka/Bussey;
    - & 2 reserve interior OL: Wendell, Orhnberger/Ojinnaka/Bussey.

    Kaczur was kept on the active roster during the early part of 2006: Game Log 2006. It seems likely NE gives him some time this season to recover.

    Ojinnaka is suspended for Game One, this allows NE to keep another player in his place for that one game. They don't have to keep an OL, since the second reserve OT is usually inactive on game day.

    Larsen, Welch, and Simmons are battling for PSquad slots. Bussey and Orhnberger both have PSquad eligibility and could be released with the hope of making through waivers.

    Ghiaciuc is a solid veteran, I just have Wendell ahead of him for all three positions, and I think Orhnberger is a mauler being groomed to be Neal's eventual replacement.

    NE will most likely keep 9 OL (including Kaczur) + Ojinnaka (suspended) for the opening day roster. Starters plus Levoir, Kaczur, Wendell, Orhnberger.

    If they keep 10 + Ojinnaka, I'd expect it to be Bussey.

    Ghiuciuc and Simmons are likely pointed at the shadow roster. If I was Dante I'd try to slide Larsen to the PSquad. I think Welch will be better at OT after a year of Woicik & Nash, if Dante wants to take the time to develop him; otherwise, I see Bussey getting the PSquad OT slot.

    PATSYLICIOUS Pro Bowl Player

    #12 Jersey

    10 usually gets the job done on my Madden franchise
  6. lillestroom

    lillestroom Practice Squad Player

    No. We need 10. We need three QBs. I'm sorry but we've gotten by thru the skin of our teeth in the past and it could bite us in the ass.

    We TT went down and Cassel went in, the playbook was significantly simplified. Result: We became way too easy to predict Games that went our way were due to individual talents and average opposition.
  7. DocE

    DocE Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Right now, I'd only keep 8 on the 53. I don't think guys like Welch, Larsen, and Bussey have shown enough to be on the roster. Ideally, I'd bring those 3 to the practice squad for a total of 11 OL with the team (8 on the 3, 3 on the PS). Of course, they could keep 9 on the 53, but they likely will only dress 7 on the active 45. I just don't think any of the later round OL have shown enough potential to stash them on the 53 and make them inactive every week.
  8. patriotscpfc

    patriotscpfc Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Miami and Jets @ Gillette and San Diego on the West Coast had absolutely nothing to do with Cassel having a simplified playbook. The Colts loss may have done, but a David Thomas penalty and a Gaffney drop lost that game. Steelers game we lost because of Welker being murdered across the middle and a Special Teams mistake.

    Who do you suggest should be our 3rd QB?

    Robinson? Don't make me laugh, he might just about get on the Practice Squad.

    Brady and Hoyer is fine.

    9 OL is fine with 2 on the Practice Squad and Ojinnaka inactive for the first week with another possibly sliding to the Practice Squad or IR in Week 1.
  9. convertedpatsfan

    convertedpatsfan Supporter Supporter

    #12 Jersey

    My guess would be 9 on opening day (including Kaczur), with Ojinnaka added after week 1. That'd give us 10 roster spots, but really only 9 linemen until Kaczur comes back.

    Big assumption on Kaczur though, but he hasn't been IR'd so hoping he makes it back at some point. I'd think Ojinnaka's versatility at guard and tackle would mean he's active all the time.

    And I don't expect Mankins to join this group at any point...
  10. stinkypete

    stinkypete In the Starting Line-Up

    #24 Jersey

    3 QB on the roster? Who's going to be #3, Zack Robinson? Waste of roster space.

    10-11 OL's, only 7 are going to see the field in a game. We're going to keep 3-4 inactive players at a single position? Waste of roster space.

    Why do I think it is a waste of space? Well, if we have to play Robinson at QB at any time this season, we're screwed. Simple as that. If Brady and Hoyer both went down, we'd be just as well bringing in a JAG off the street. That's my take anyway.

    As for OL, if we sustain so many injuries to the OL that we have to exhaust options 10 or 11, again, we're screwed. Besides, options 10 and 11 will both be on the practice squad, eligible for call up if needed.
  11. patriotscpfc

    patriotscpfc Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    If Brady went down for 2 weeks and Hoyer got hurt, i'd rather run the wildcat with Edelman and Faulk with Tate and Wes on the field for the entire game.

    There'd be no need to use Moss for that game.
  12. jmt57

    jmt57 Moderator Staff Member Supporter

    What quarterback that was available at any point of this past off-season should the Pats have acquired, that would give the team a better chance of succeeding than Hoyer would?

    Now if you're talking about a third QB on the practice squad for developmental purposes, that's fine. But if you are advocating one less lineman so the Pats can carry a third QB on the 53-man roster, I'm going to respectfully disagree; to me that's a wasted roster spot.

    As far as simplifying the playbook goes, I'd say there's probably more likelihood of that happening for a veteran that is brought in this late than there is for Hoyer, who has had seventeen months in the system at this point.
  13. Ron Sellers

    Ron Sellers 2nd Team Getting Their First Start

    A couple of things to consider:

    There are a lot of injuries to offensive linemen over the course of the season. Not just season-ending IR injuries, but things like sprained ankles and twisted knees. These are really big guys putting a lot of stress on their lower body, getting constantly hit by even bigger guys on the other side of the ball. Do we really expect Stephen Neal to be available for every game? It's not as simple as saying here are my five starters and a couple of backups.

    Football is not like baseball where you send a developing player to the minor leagues. While the practice squad is available, there is zero guarantee that a player will make it there. Another team may sign him either after he is cut, or after he lands on the practice squad. In addition the player may decide his chances of making it to an NFL roster are better with another team, like Buffalo or Tampa Bay, for example. While the Pats would add someone else to the PS, the chances of him contributing this year would be much less; he would be four months behind other players in learning the system.

    Bottom line is that I would prefer keeping one more offensive lineman on the 53-man roster, even if he is most likely going to be a game day inactive. You can't really count on designating a player for the practice squad and him being available later if you need him.
  14. RayClay

    RayClay Hall of Fame Poster

    #75 Jersey

    We need 9 or 10 linemen. Without Mankins we'll go back to rotating linemen so we have consistency through injuries. Rest Neal occasionally too.Anyone that can't play or isn't eligible for the squad, cut them.

    I have no problem with loading the squad at a certain position, since we actually have used it for OL and other positions have never contributed to the team, so what's the point.

    what I'm saying is, if you're going to hit the waiver wire for a need at a certain position, who cares if there's someone at that position on the PS?
  15. mgteich

    mgteich Veteran Supporter

    Having SEVEN offensive linemen provides for two on the field injuries. Consider having Wendell, LeVoir and Ojinnaka as our three backups, giving us EIGHT, seven active plus an inactive player. Because Ojinnaka can play both tackle and guard, we would be prepared for two injuries. We can't prepare for more. I think that we would be prepared for injuries with the players listed.

    We can indeed count on the Practice Squad. In the past, we have have often had a lineman there who we have brought up during the season. One strategy Belichick has used is to pay a lineman full roster pay while on the Practice Squad. He did that for Yates and Wendell. For the offensive line, the Practice Squad can be the place for backups.

    I think that we need a TOTAL of 11 offensive linemen. As has been posted, the norm is 9 on the active roster and 2 on the Practice Squad (one interior and one tackle). My suggestion is to switch the allocation of the 11 to 8 on the 53 man roster and 3 on the Practice Squad. I suggest this because of the mix of vets and youth. It seems that we would be fine with three of Welch, Bussey, Ohrnberger and Larsen being on the Practice Squad.

    Yes, THREE offensive linemen is one too many on the Practice Squad, UNLESS we can save a needed roster spot on the 53, perhaps for Green-Ellis, perhaps for a special teamer, perhaps for Wheatley.


    For me, the real roster question is whether to include an additional veteran, who cannot be on the Practice Squad. If Kaczur is expected to be healthy by mid-season, I think it likely that he will get a roster spot. If not, then for me the question is whether Ghiaciuc is worth a roster spot. I can certainly understand keeping him as our #9 offensive lineman.

    Do you agree? Do any deserve a roster spot?

    Ojinnaka and Ghiaciuc are probably better players and likely better prospects.

  16. BPF

    BPF In the Starting Line-Up

    Great thread, I've been thinking along the same lines. I just don't think that some of these back ups have earned the right to be on the 53 and they need some development.

    At this point I would go with, 9 for opening day roster simply because you'll leave yourself too light inside if you go with 8 -- unless of course Kaczur is IR'd then that is a possibility. When Ojinnaka is back from suspension after game 1 Wendell will be waived. If the Pats can't pick up a C/G type via trade or waiver claim then Ghiaciuc will be back for game 2 roster:

    OT’s: Light, Volmer, LeVoir (3)

    C/OG’s: Koppen, Neal, Connolly, Wendell, Kaczur, Trade/Waiver claim, Ojinnaka* (6)

    PS: Simmons or Welch, Larsen
    Last edited: Aug 29, 2010
  17. mgteich

    mgteich Veteran Supporter

    1) I am fine with 9 OL's if one is Kaczur.

    2) I am fine with only 3 OT's since Ojinnaka is a RT.

    3) I am fine with a free agent replacing Wendell at G/C. I am not sure if the choice of Ghiaciuc is better than Wendell as our backup center. But, we agree. Belichick will be looking for a G/C on the waiver wire before and after Game 1.

    4) I have one nitpick with your plan. Why isn't Ghiaciuc on your 53 instead of Wendell? After all, you believe that ir Ghiaciuc that would make the 53 if we can't find a free agent. Does he enough service to guarantee his salary if he plays one game?

  18. BradyFTW!

    BradyFTW! Supporter Supporter

    #12 Jersey

    I wouldn't be at all surprised if Deaderick doesn't make it to the PS. He has enough positional experience, and has shown enough so far, that there are a couple teams that would probably grab him if they got the chance.
  19. Box_O_Rocks

    Box_O_Rocks Supporter Supporter

    'trained pigs' will be just fine
    People here and elsewhere seem quick to dismiss Wendell, but in addition what Light and Chris Price have to say I recall reading that in practice Wendell comes in at LG when Connolly takes his FB reps, Wendell has also been taking FB reps in practice, and in the games Wendell has been part of the Wedge on KR, and perhaps even more importantly, when Ojinnaka took his first game reps as a Pat at RT - Wendell was his RG. I call on you long time observers to note how Wendell, like Hochstien and Connolly before him, is following the classic Scarnecchia utility infielder playbook from PSquad to preseason (which is why I think he's next up in the batting order).
  20. mgteich

    mgteich Veteran Supporter

    I agree. LeVoir and Wendell are the current Game Day backups. Wendell was on the 53 for some of last year, and was paid full roster pay when on the Practice Squad. Dante and Belichick think of him as part of the roster. With Mankins gone, and Connolly moved up, it seems that it is time for Wendell to be on the 53 on a full time basis.

    With Connolly starting at LG, Wendell is our backup center. Wendell is also the first off the bench at both guard positions.

    The open question is who will be chosen as the inactive OL backup or backups. Kaczur and Ojinnaka seem to be the be best choices at the moment, with Ghiaciuc or a TBD free agent as other options.

    It is a disappointment for many that only one of the five offensive linemen drafted in 2009 and 2010 are likely to make the 53 man roster, even if we don't have Mankins and Kaczur.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page