Kaczur, Patriots headed for split

[ausbacker]

So back to the topic at hand. Does anybody actually care that Kaczur isn't being extended with the Patriots? Seems an overwhelming I can't remember you doing anything good for me ever or lately.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

Earlier, I made fun of people saying Light couldn't possibly play RT. Whether that was a misrepresentation of what he said is a moot point IMO.

BB doesn't say things to explain his decisions. He makes decisions for his own reasons and makes statements for political (team unity, etc.) reasons.

He obviously thought Light was the best LT candidate on the team that fit his salary structure. When he got Volmer, he showed, despite being raw, a lot of physical potential (ranginess, quick feet) for left tackle.

By emphasizing how Volmer has the ability to play both, plays RT well, Light is a much better fit at LT, he neatly sidesteps the question, who is the best LT?

Anyone notice this? Volmer gets to work his way in (he's green) Light gets his ego saved, that's what being a coach of men is about.

If he decides to put Light at RT, Volmer at LT, there will be a slew of new quotes explaining what he decided to do that still won't say one or the other is a better LT.

Light's always wanted to prove his flexibility, Volmer has worked real hard at rt, we wanted to give him a longer look at lt etc.

Whatever allows everyone to feel praised, save face.

I think BB is more concerned doing what is best for the team than he is about saving players egos. Risk Brady's health because he doesn't want to hurt Light's feelings, Does that sound like Belichick? Vollmer started 6 games at left tackle in 09 and played fine. If the best combination was Light at RT and Vollmer at LT he would have made the switch. He didn't, he kept Light at LT and Vollmer to RT. So we have BB actions followed by these words.

"It’s a little unusual for tackles to be able to play both sides at a high level, period," Belichick said. "Usually when you look at the normal draft board, you look at tackles, and you say, ‘This tackle’s more of a left tackle, this guy’s more of a right tackle"

"I put (Light) at right tackle as a rookie. It didn’t really work out at all."
"Matt’s just a left tackle"
"Once we got him back to left tackle, he was a much better football player"
"He’s a much better left tackle than he was a right tackle"

Light is not going to be playing RT.

 

[Ring 6]

I think BB is more concerned doing what is best for the team than he is about saving players egos. Risk Brady's health because he doesn't want to hurt Light's feelings, Does that sound like Belichick? Vollmer started 6 games at left tackle in 09 and played fine. If the best combination was Light at RT and Vollmer at LT he would have made the switch. He didn't, he kept Light at LT and Vollmer to RT. So we have BB actions followed by these words.

"It’s a little unusual for tackles to be able to play both sides at a high level, period," Belichick said. "Usually when you look at the normal draft board, you look at tackles, and you say, ‘This tackle’s more of a left tackle, this guy’s more of a right tackle"

"I put (Light) at right tackle as a rookie. It didn’t really work out at all."
"Matt’s just a left tackle"
"Once we got him back to left tackle, he was a much better football player"
"He’s a much better left tackle than he was a right tackle"

Light is not going to be playing RT.

OK.
HERE is what you said that I responded to:

Matt Lights days as a Left Tackle are nearing an end IMO, pro bowl or not. BB has stated Light is not an option at RT


First, Light just made the probowl
Second Lights 'days being over a LT' would mean he was supplanted by Vollmer.
Nothing in BBs comments suggests that if we found a better LT than Light that Light would be ruled out of the RT competition.

You have turned that ridiculous couple of sentences into you being right because BB says Light is better on the left side than the right.
The comments you keep quoting PARTS OF and bolding are not a valid defense of your original bending of the facts.

Of course please tell me how this:

When you look at his skills, I don’t think you look at him and say, ‘Well, I don’t think he has the skills to play right tackle.’

says he isnt an option if we need a RT. Hint: Thats BB saying the opposite of what you are crediting him for

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

OK.
HERE is what you said that I responded to:

Matt Lights days as a Left Tackle are nearing an end IMO, pro bowl or not. BB has stated Light is not an option at RT

His days at LT are nearing an end is my opinion not fact that's why I said IMO.


First, Light just made the probowl

I know that's why I said pro bowl.

Second Lights 'days being over a LT' would mean he was supplanted by Vollmer.
Nothing in BBs comments suggests that if we found a better LT than Light that Light would be ruled out of the RT competition.

And where would Vollmer go, to guard, to the bench?
Neither he will play either RT or LT.

You have turned that ridiculous couple of sentences into you being right because BB says Light is better on the left side than the right.
The comments you keep quoting PARTS OF and bolding are not a valid defense of your original bending of the facts.

Of course please tell me how this:

When you look at his skills, I don’t think you look at him and say, ‘Well, I don’t think he has the skills to play right tackle.’

says he isnt an option if we need a RT. Hint: Thats BB saying the opposite of what you are crediting him for

I've already said that it was highlighted by accident because I was scanning it quickly. There where so many quotes in there I wasn't reading them carefully, so once again it was highlighted mistakenly. However if this is your ace in the hole in the discussion BB is saying that he has the (physical) skills to play it but taken with the other quotes for whatever reason the skills don't translate to RT as well as they do at LT. Basically he has the skills to play both but plays LT at a higher level than RT.

BB has stated Light is a much better left tackle than right tackle.
BB has stated Vollmer can play both at a high level.
Why would BB put Light at RT if these statements are true? To make the team weaker. That's not something BB would do.

 

[Ring 6]

I've already said that it was highlighted by accident because I was scanning it quickly. There where so many quotes in there I wasn't reading them carefully, so once again it was highlighted mistakenly. However if this is your ace in the hole in the discussion BB is saying that he has the (physical) skills to play it but taken with the other quotes for whatever reason the skills don't translate to RT as well as they do at LT. Basically he has the skills to play both but plays LT at a higher level than RT.

BB has stated Light is a much better left tackle than right tackle.
BB has stated Vollmer can play both at a high level.
Why would BB put Light at RT if these statements are true? To make the team weaker. That's not something BB would do.

Highlighting by accident doesn't change the fact that it said the opposite of what you were implying it did.

There is no 'ace in the hole'

You said BB has stated that Light is not an option at RT.
THAT IS WRONG

BB has stated that Light is a better LT, but likely could play RT.

Given that Light is a better LT than Vollmer and Vollmer is a better RT than Light, on this team, as currently constructed there would be no reason to play Light at RT, but that is not what you said.

You also are ignoring again that you preceeded that comment by saying Light was about through as a LT. That has a lot to do with it, and you keep telling me which of your words I was responding to which is wrong.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

Highlighting by accident doesn't change the fact that it said the opposite of what you were implying it did.

There is no 'ace in the hole'

You said BB has stated that Light is not an option at RT.
THAT IS WRONG

BB has stated that Light is a better LT, but likely could play RT.

Given that Light is a better LT than Vollmer and Vollmer is a better RT than Light, on this team, as currently constructed there would be no reason to play Light at RT, but that is not what you said.

You also are ignoring again that you preceeded that comment by saying Light was about through as a LT. That has a lot to do with it, and you keep telling me which of your words I was responding to which is wrong.

Ok Light is an option at RT if the goal is to make the team worse.
Of course Light could play RT, the question is how well.
It is not a given that Light is a better LT than Vollmer, It is a given that Matt Light is a better LT than he is a RT, according to BB.
Out of the options of Vollmer/Light at RT/LT we know the one that BB has spoken negatively about it is Light at RT.

You've accused me of interpreting BB statements falsely. Please show me where BB said Light likely could play RT. Not maybe could play it, likely could play it.

 

[Ring 6]

Ok Light is an option at RT if the goal is to make the team worse.
Of course Light could play RT, the question is how well.
It is not a given that Light is a better LT than Vollmer, It is a given that Matt Light is a better LT than he is a RT, according to BB.
Out of the options of Vollmer/Light at RT/LT we know the one that BB has spoken negatively about it is Light at RT.

You've accused me of interpreting BB statements falsely. Please show me where BB said Light likely could play RT. Not maybe, likely.

You have posted the comments. If you cant comprehend them, me reposting them won't help.
You took comments BB made while discussing Vollmer and contrasting him to Light, while describing Light's rookie year, and made them something they were not, including trying to say a comment preceeded by "I'm not saying" meant what followed.
The comments were about Vollmers skillset and how he fits at RT even though he could be a LT in the future, and you are using them as a comphensive analysis of Matt Light, which is ignorant.

Once again, you have pretended that you didnt make half of your original statement.

Lets just end it this way. I think that you read something and are misinterpretting it and ignoring the context it was made in, and your misuse of the comments distorts the meaning you imply.
You think otherwise.
No matter how much I explain the above you will not get it, and no matter how much you keep repeating the same thing I will still see you misunderstanding it.
Thats fine.
Its perfectly OK for 2 people to interpret the same thing 2 different ways.
To continue to go bak and forth about it though is foolish.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

You have posted the comments. If you cant comprehend them, me reposting them won't help.
You took comments BB made while discussing Vollmer and contrasting him to Light, while describing Light's rookie year, and made them something they were not, including trying to say a comment preceeded by "I'm not saying" meant what followed.
The comments were about Vollmers skillset and how he fits at RT even though he could be a LT in the future, and you are using them as a comphensive analysis of Matt Light, which is ignorant.

Once again, you have pretended that you didnt make half of your original statement.

Lets just end it this way. I think that you read something and are misinterpretting it and ignoring the context it was made in, and your misuse of the comments distorts the meaning you imply.
You think otherwise.
No matter how much I explain the above you will not get it, and no matter how much you keep repeating the same thing I will still see you misunderstanding it.
Thats fine.
Its perfectly OK for 2 people to interpret the same thing 2 different ways.
To continue to go bak and forth about it though is foolish.

Yeah I'm done with this subject and your passive aggressive tone is dually noted. Be careful when tossing around terms like ignorant when your own interpretation of this subject is highly questionable itself.

 

[RayClay]

I think BB is more concerned doing what is best for the team than he is about saving players egos. Risk Brady's health because he doesn't want to hurt Light's feelings, Does that sound like Belichick? Vollmer started 6 games at left tackle in 09 and played fine. If the best combination was Light at RT and Vollmer at LT he would have made the switch. He didn't, he kept Light at LT and Vollmer to RT. So we have BB actions followed by these words.

"It’s a little unusual for tackles to be able to play both sides at a high level, period," Belichick said. "Usually when you look at the normal draft board, you look at tackles, and you say, ‘This tackle’s more of a left tackle, this guy’s more of a right tackle"

"I put (Light) at right tackle as a rookie. It didn’t really work out at all."
"Matt’s just a left tackle"
"Once we got him back to left tackle, he was a much better football player"
"He’s a much better left tackle than he was a right tackle"

Light is not going to be playing RT.

Managing players is what great coaches do. It is best for the team. If he can have two good tackles. If he thought Vollmer was slightly better with more upside and Light could be a good right tackle with some repetition, would he do it? After all, left tackle is the more important position.

How about if what seemed to improve the team on talent and upside for the future would cause a team leader to be uncomfortable and a young player to feel uncomfortable too, because he's taking someone's job?

If you think that coaching a team is only about coldly analyzing the talent level of each player, you are missing what makes coaches great. It is about managing people. It is about considering feelings, especially for team leaders, or for young players with little experience that don't want to be involved in a controversy among vets.

Of course, if you think everything BB says is because he wants to give us all the information and an insight to how he handles personalities and what's going on in his head, you must love his press conferences.

Vollmer is the future LT of this team. Light is a veteran with his best years behind him looking for a new contract. I have no inside information about his willingness or ability to make a switch, if it extended his career a bit, but neither do you.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

Managing players is what great coaches do. It is best for the team. If he can have two good tackles. If he thought Vollmer was slightly better with more upside and Light could be a good right tackle with some repetition, would he do it? After all, left tackle is the more important position.

How about if what seemed to improve the team on talent and upside for the future would cause a team leader to be uncomfortable and a young player to feel uncomfortable too, because he's taking someone's job?

If you think that coaching a team is only about coldly analyzing the talent level of each player, you are missing what makes coaches great. It is about managing people. It is about considering feelings, especially for team leaders, or for young players with little experience that don't want to be involved in a controversy among vets.

Of course, if you think everything BB says is because he wants to give us all the information and an insight to how he handles personalities and what's going on in his head, you must love his press conferences.

Vollmer is the future LT of this team. Light is a veteran with his best years behind him looking for a new contract. I have no inside information about his willingness or ability to make a switch, if it extended his career a bit, but neither do you.

You have BB actions, followed by his words. You are choosing not to acknowledge them.

 

[Ring 6]

Yeah I'm done with this subject and your passive aggressive tone is dually noted. Be careful when tossing around terms like ignorant when your own interpretation of this subject is highly questionable itself.

There you go, on top of eliminating the sentences that conflict with your conclusion, you don't even recognize that the topic of the discussion was VOLLMER being able to play both sides, and Light was referenced as a comparision.
That is what is ignorant. You type those quotes, leave out the context, ignore NOT and act as if what follows is affirmative, and call it BBs point blank analysis of Matt Light as a RT.

Actually, my interpretation isn't really questionable at all, because I am considering the ENTIRE discussion, and accepting it for what it is, context and all, and I have no agenda, unlike you who are feverish trying to defend your misinterpretation to the point of ignoring "I'm not saying" to use the statement that follows to me he IS saying.
I'm glad you are 'done' because this has become silly.

 

[Real World]

He's the most overrated lineman on the roster. He's damaged goods, and nothing more than a back up on a good team. He's easily replacable IMO.

 

[Ring 6]

He's the most overrated lineman on the roster. He's damaged goods, and nothing more than a back up on a good team. He's easily replacable IMO.

Well, he was already replaced by Vollmer.
He is a guy competing for playing time who has to switch positions to be more competitive.
For some reason people seem to have viewed his position switch as a necessity for the LG spot rather than an attempt to give him a tryout since he lost the RT job.
That tryout lasted 1 day.
Of course he needs to take a paycut because backups who may challenge for playing time cant make 3.5 million.
I think we have heard reports of the initial reaction. That could change when reality sets in. It would be great to have Kaczur on the roster. A former starter at both LT and RT who may possibly also be able to play G is valuable. Not 3.5 mill valuable, but at the right price he'd be great to have here.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

There you go, on top of eliminating the sentences that conflict with your conclusion, you don't even recognize that the topic of the discussion was VOLLMER being able to play both sides, and Light was referenced as a comparision.
That is what is ignorant. You type those quotes, leave out the context, ignore NOT and act as if what follows is affirmative, and call it BBs point blank analysis of Matt Light as a RT.

Actually, my interpretation isn't really questionable at all, because I am considering the ENTIRE discussion, and accepting it for what it is, context and all, and I have no agenda, unlike you who are feverish trying to defend your misinterpretation to the point of ignoring "I'm not saying" to use the statement that follows to me he IS saying.
I'm glad you are 'done' because this has become silly.

The quote that you keep harping on does nothing to further your argument. Just to let you know.

No need to respond any more, I understand what your take is on this.

Must.. Have...Last... Word.... I...Am.... Right... You....Are..... Wrong.....

 

[Ring 6]

The quote that you keep harping on does nothing to further your argument. Just to let you know.

No need to respond any more, I understand what your take is on this.

Must.. Have...Last... Word.... I...Am.... Right... You....Are..... Wrong.....

It would appear that you are intent on having the last word.

When you cite BB saying "Light can't play RT" and leave out that the words before that was "Its not like" it is critical information.
I'm not trying to 'further an argument' I am simply pointing out you are misusing what was said.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

It would appear that you are intent on having the last word.

When you cite BB saying "Light can't play RT" and leave out that the words before that was "Its not like" it is critical information.
I'm not trying to 'further an argument' I am simply pointing out you are misusing what was said.

I bolded in red the quote that you can't stop bringing up. As I've said now for the third time it was bolded as I was scanning the many quotes from BB on how Light is not a good fit at RT. Taken in context, I don't know why you keep bringing it up time and time again as that part means nothing except he has the physical "skills" to play the position. He says the same thing two sentences earlier. In the same paragraph BB says without question that Light has been tried at RT and "didn't work out at all".


"In my brilliance," Belichick said with a smile, "I put (Light) at right tackle as a rookie. It didn’t really work out at all. He has the physical skills to play over there. But, then, he just … Matt’s just a left tackle. When you look at his skills, I don’t think you look at him and say, ‘Well, I don’t think he has the skills to play right tackle.'

"But he’s just much more comfortable on the left side and he’s a much better left tackle than he was a right tackle, when we tried to play him there his rookie year. Once we got him back to left tackle, he was a much better football player. That was his rookie year, so maybe if it was his third year, he would’ve adjusted to it better. I don’t know, we just left him at left because he’s done a good job for us over there."

 

[Ring 6]

I bolded in red the quote that you can't stop bringing up. As I've said now for the third time it was bolded as I was scanning the many quotes from BB on how Light is not a good fit at RT. Taken in context, I don't know why you keep bringing it up time and time again as that part means nothing except he has the physical "skills" to play the position. He says the same thing two sentences earlier. In the same paragraph BB says without question that Light has been tried at RT and "didn't work out at all".


"In my brilliance," Belichick said with a smile, "I put (Light) at right tackle as a rookie. It didn’t really work out at all. He has the physical skills to play over there. But, then, he just … Matt’s just a left tackle. When you look at his skills, I don’t think you look at him and say, ‘Well, I don’t think he has the skills to play right tackle.'

"But he’s just much more comfortable on the left side and he’s a much better left tackle than he was a right tackle, when we tried to play him there his rookie year. Once we got him back to left tackle, he was a much better football player. That was his rookie year, so maybe if it was his third year, he would’ve adjusted to it better. I don’t know, we just left him at left because he’s done a good job for us over there."

Apologozing for making an error does not make you correct.
At this point its just become funny, because while you have ignore the first half of your comment I responded to all along even after I pointed it out, you continue to also ignore context, however, the best part is that you post that I have to have the last word, yet you can't stop responding.

Do you need the last word? Lets see.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

Apologozing for making an error does not make you correct.
At this point its just become funny, because while you have ignore the first half of your comment I responded to all along even after I pointed it out, you continue to also ignore context, however, the best part is that you post that I have to have the last word, yet you can't stop responding.

Do you need the last word? Lets see.

I do! I do!

I wasn't apologizing, I was explaining that the one thing you've been clinging in every one of your responses to me means very little other than he has the physical skills to play a position. Marc Wilson had the physical skills to play QB, Scott Sisson had the physical skills be a kicker. Does that mean they were any good? It was explained for now the forth time that it wasn't meant to be included but even if it was, it did nothing to benefit your side of the internet battle or take away anything from mine. It's a moot point.

 

[zipster9]

He's the most overrated lineman on the roster. He's damaged goods, and nothing more than a back up on a good team. He's easily replacable IMO.

Yes. I hope Patriots cut this guy... Pass Rushers push him around like a, ragged-doll...

 

[Triumph]

Yes. I hope Patriots cut this guy... Pass Rushers push him around like a, ragged-doll...

Kaczur was cut last week.