Nick Kaczur should be able to practice today....

[Kasmir]

I don't believe what I'm reading.

O'Callahan as the starter and Nick as a backup???? O'Callahan has not done anything yet. Wow, he started in a pre-season game.

Nick has been tested last year under very difficult conditions and passed the test vey well.

Sure I like most of what O'Callahan did last week. But, lets not get the 'flavor of the week" confused with the guy who actually did the job during the regular season.

I know he did it at LT, but LT is more difficult and he's a more natural RT.

O'Callahan was voted the top Pac-10 OL last year by Pac-10 DL, i.e he beat out both USC guys including D'Brickashaw Ferguson. He dropped because concerns about his health (shoulders, concussions) and foot speed. Going into his senior year he was a projected first rounder. He excelled at the highest level in college, unlike Kaczur. Kaczur last year showed he can play in the NFL, and he's still improving, but O'C's upside right now is much higher. He's flashing that he can play at a high level in the NFL, too. If anyone knew he would look this good he would have gone first or second round this spring. He's impressed the Patriots enough for them to dump Gorin now even after losing Ashworth last year. You may have reservations, but the Patriots are signalling they're quite excited about O'C. Dumping Gorin means they need Kaczur to back up Light. Kaczur could still beat O'C out at RT, but my opinion is that Kaczur will be a better swing tackle and O'C is much more a protypical power RT -- who's showing surprisingly good feet.

Thats' what's so exciting about the draft -- you never know how good (or bad!) these guys are going to be until they actually start playing...

 

[sieglo]

Good lord.

Given Kaczur's experience and performance last year, the ONLY way O'Callaghan starts is if Kaczur is still not 100%, injury wise, conditioning wise, or playbook wise.

 

[primetime]

Some people pointed out after the season last year that Kaczur was the best guy on the line, better than Mankins or Neal, even. He started games at left tackle, protecting Brady's blindside. Clearly the coaching staff thought fairly highly of him in that case. He'll start over O'Callaghan, but O'C is a guy who has alot of potential and will be great with a year as a backup under his belt.

 

[Kasmir]

A starter does not lose his job to injury..

Wasn't that Drew's argument? Or was it Borges's?

Dante has shown zero reluctance to start rookies, i.e Light/Koppen/Mankins/Kaczur all started as rookies. IF O'C can play better than Kaczur he'll beat him out. With Kaczur coming back from injury it's highly likely O'C will start at RT.

 

[Kasmir]

Good lord.

Given Kaczur's experience and performance last year, the ONLY way O'Callaghan starts is if Kaczur is still not 100%, injury wise, conditioning wise, or playbook wise.

Dante doesn't demonstrate he puts a premium on experience, so it comes down to performance. How do you know what the limits on O'C's performance are? I haven't heard anyone suggesting Kaczur should displace Light, who is hardly an all pro. So all you Kaczur partisans are claiming that while Kaczur isn't good enough to unseat and average NFL left tackle, he's sure to be better at right tackle -- a position he didn't play that demands more strength and size -- than the rookie O'C. You may be right, but how can you be so sure before O'C has shown what he can do?

 

[Ichiro]

As far as comparing Kaczur and O'Callaghan, I would have to lean towards Kaczur (barring health, of course).

Kaczur showed a lot last year under extremely difficult circumstances. Playing both tackle spots, he showed as much quickness as Ashworth and more point of attack strength than Light (although O'Callaghan is a mauler). His pass protection got so much better after the Pitt game, and I felt he could be as good as Light or even better.

O'Callaghan is very good run blocker, but missed some pass blocking assignments Saturday night, something I think all rookies struggle with. I don't think the coaches want Brady to take the beating he did last year and I'm not sure O'Callaghan can handle all the twists and stunts opposing defenses are going to throw at our suspect pass-blocking right side. (Neal has breakdowns in pass-protecting, too, many more than Light and Mankins)

I think our OL would be at its best with Kaczur at RT

BTW: on one blog I saw that a reporter said Hochstein had a good game on Sat. I completely disagreed. I think Hochstein is a good fill-in but he got abused by Dockett and a few other DL of the Cards. When we get Koppen and Kaczur back, I think this could be one of the strongest OL the Patriots have ever had.

 

[Kasmir]

As far as comparing Kaczur and O'Callaghan, I would have to lean towards Kaczur (barring health, of course).

Kaczur showed a lot last year under extremely difficult circumstances. Playing both tackle spots, he showed as much quickness as Ashworth and more point of attack strength than Light (although O'Callaghan is a mauler). His pass protection got so much better after the Pitt game, and I felt he could be as good as Light or even better.

O'Callaghan is very good run blocker, but missed some pass blocking assignments Saturday night, something I think all rookies struggle with. I don't think the coaches want Brady to take the beating he did last year and I'm not sure O'Callaghan can handle all the twists and stunts opposing defenses are going to throw at our suspect pass-blocking right side. (Neal has breakdowns in pass-protecting, too, many more than Light and Mankins)

I think our OL would be at its best with Kaczur at RT

BTW: on one blog I saw that a reporter said Hochstein had a good game on Sat. I completely disagreed. I think Hochstein is a good fill-in but he got abused by Dockett and a few other DL of the Cards. When we get Koppen and Kaczur back, I think this could be one of the strongest OL the Patriots have ever had.

Good arguments. We shall see how it plays out.

The reason some of us are excited about O'C is because we'd like to see someone emerge at an all-pro level on our oline. Maybe it will be Mankins. Maybe Koppen or Kaczur. Probably not Neal. Light has topped out. O'C as the new kid has the most upside (and downside) because he's the unknown. So of course we're rooting for him.

 

[pats1]

Dante doesn't demonstrate he puts a premium on experience, so it comes down to performance. How do you know what the limits on O'C's performance are? I haven't heard anyone suggesting Kaczur should displace Light, who is hardly an all pro. So all you Kaczur partisans are claiming that while Kaczur isn't good enough to unseat and average NFL left tackle, he's sure to be better at right tackle -- a position he didn't play that demands more strength and size -- than the rookie O'C. You may be right, but how can you be so sure before O'C has shown what he can do?

Light's has been, and still is the Pats' best offensive lineman.

 

[BelichickFan]

I think a class of remedial reading is in order

LMAO, from the person who said :

"Just heard that he is expected to practice..so all speculation about PUP for him is gone. I think that means he is closer to playing shape than not."

When replying to a subject of :

"Nick Kaczur should be able to practice today...."

 

[Oswlek]

DUMB question.....Just because Kaczur is starting to practice does NOT mean he is ready to play or is even close to being in game shape form. If this is a healthy Kaczur READY physically to play it's a no-brainer..but that may NOT be what the choice is. Would you rather have a Kaczur starting the season and rehabbing and NOT ready to play or a healthy Britt who is learning the position..a rook?? (I don't even agree that this may be the choice..but it's one that I was asked about...) A bit different a choice do you not agree?? What if Kaczur isn't really ready to play for a few games..or a month?? I think that is where the decision has to be made. If K can be game time in the first few games, then yes, he should get himself in shape ASAP. If on the other hands there is doubt, why rush him and maybe cause more harm in the long run. If that is the case PUP and have a healthy lineman ready to play Game 1.

Uhhh...I'm not really sure where you are going with this. If BB says he is ready to play then why keep him on the PUP?

You just essentially created a mythical situation and used that as grounds to insult me. Congratulations.

 

[shakadave]

Good arguments. We shall see how it plays out.

This "problem" is a nice one to have! Instead of "who'd good enough to be our RT" we're debating "which good RT should play a backup role and rotate in?"

 

[Kasmir]

Light's has been, and still is the Pats' best offensive lineman.

Yep, although nobody but homers think he's an all pro. Mankins may surpass him this year. Some of you talk as if all starting tackles are necessarily better than any other linemen, just because they play left tackle...

 

[PATSNUTme]

Yep, although nobody but homers think he's an all pro. Mankins may surpass him this year. Some of you talk as if all starting tackles are necessarily better than any other linemen, just because they play left tackle...

I haven't seen anyone say that Light was "All Pro".

There's that word again.

OK, you used the word so please give us a difinition. What is a 'homer"?

 

[patchick]

I'm not sure O'Callaghan can handle all the twists and stunts opposing defenses are going to throw at our suspect pass-blocking right side. (Neal has breakdowns in pass-protecting, too, many more than Light and Mankins)

Ok...suppose that all of the above is true, but that O'Callaghan is a huge asset as a run blocker. Just thought I'd throw out an alternate lineup:

Light-Mankins-Koppen-Kaczur-O'Callaghan

Anybody?

 

[pats1]

Ok...suppose that all of the above is true, but that O'Callaghan is a huge asset as a run blocker. Just thought I'd throw out an alternate lineup:

Light-Mankins-Koppen-Kaczur-O'Callaghan

Anybody?

I would want Neal starting...

But in terms of Pats draft picks in the past 5 years, that lineup is good.

 

[PATSNUTme]

Ok...suppose that all of the above is true, but that O'Callaghan is a huge asset as a run blocker. Just thought I'd throw out an alternate lineup:

Light-Mankins-Koppen-Kaczur-O'Callaghan

Anybody?

I would prefer Neal to stay at guard and nick at RT. Who knows, by the end of the year we may have that line.

We are in a pretty good position to even be thinking this way.

 

[Mike the Brit]

I haven't seen anyone say that Light was "All Pro".

There's that word again.

OK, you used the word so please give us a difinition. What is a 'homer"?

(Assuming you're serious.)

An objective fan sees unpleasant truths and undesirable likelihoods about the team, though he wishes they weren't so and hopes that they don't come true; a homer doesn't acknowledge their existence.

That said, if anyone had predicted at the start of 2001 what the Patriots would achieve in the next five years, they would have been accused of being not just a homer but a staring-eyed lunatic.

 

[PATSNUTme]

(Assuming you're serious.)

An objective fan sees unpleasant truths and undesirable likelihoods about the team, though he wishes they weren't so and hopes that they don't come true; a homer doesn't acknowledge their existence.

That said, if anyone had predicted at the start of 2001 what the Patriots would achieve in the next five years, they would have been accused of being not just a homer but a staring-eyed lunatic.

OH, I'm serious.

I've been called a homer. I consider myself to be a homer. My new location is Homerville.

Yet, every time it's defined it doesn't seem to fit me. Usually those who use the term don't come forward and define it.

It's usually those who have been patriots fans for 10 years or less who use the term. The don't know that we who have been fans for much longer have seen plenty of dark times with this team.

So, they don't understand why those of us who have been around longer are optimistic about this team and appreciate the current regime.

And, I would add, that most of them sound like they are Red Sox fans where whining, nit-picking, second guessing, and being negitive is the order of the day.

 

[SeanBruschi54]

Thank you SeanBruschi for providing the best belly laughs of the morning!!!!

Do you know of anyone with LESS NFL experience you could promote to starter? A fetus perhaps??

I'm not saying O'Callaghan won't be great, but this is ridiculous.

Hey no problem i give you my honest insight on the situation and you treat it like a joke.


I'd like to hear your opinion on the situation but you probably wont have one.

 

[Mike the Brit]

OH, I'm serious.

I've been called a homer. I consider myself to be a homer. My new location is Homerville.

Yet, every time it's defined it doesn't seem to fit me. Usually those who use the term don't come forward and define it.

It's usually those who have been patriots fans for 10 years or less who use the term. The don't know that we who have been fans for much longer have seen plenty of dark times with this team.

So, they don't understand why those of us who have been around longer are optimistic about this team and appreciate the current regime.

And, I would add, that most of them sound like they are Red Sox fans where whining, nit-picking, second guessing, and being negitive is the order of the day.

OK. Well, as I said, optimism is fine with me. Personally -- call it temperament -- I'm not so much of an optimist. But I wouldn't dream of nit-picking, second guessing or being negative. And the optimists have been proved right time and again. It doesn't mean that I don't think that Duane Starks was a disaster (and fear that Monty Beisel is not much better), though.

I think that the staggering achievements of the team put them massively in credit. I've been a fan (admittedly not the hottest or most knowledgeable fan) since 1981, so I know what you're talking about. It also makes a difference to me that I'm pretty sure that if a BB/Kraft team had a disastrous losing season it would do so with dignity -- which certainly wasn't always the case with the Pats in the past.

So at what point does the optimist become a homer?

Everyone differs, but here's an example. Last season, I happened to read a Browns message board and noticed a thread about the Patriots, speculating about Patriots -- particularly DG and Willie -- might become Browns. A couple of the biggest homers on this board (I won't name them, because they are fantastic posters whom I respect immensely) dismissed the very raising of the idea as absurd. Willie was under contract and would certainly retire a Patriot.

It doesn't thrill me at all that they were completely wrong (which doesn't make me "right", by the way -- I hadn't speculated that it would happen, just reported that Brown fans wanted it) but I do think that it's a pity if the homers on the board jump on anything that isn't wildly optimistic as disloyal and the product of a moaning, negative, bandwagon fan.