Re: Pats bringing in OT/G Barry Simms for a visit Wednesday
I have a silly idea.
If we are worried about Neal's health, then let's sign someone who actually plays RG. Why would we want to sign someone who would need to convert to that position, or why would we try to convert Kazcur? Ditto for RT.
mg,
Because the BB/SP duo have the RG that they originally drafted to fill that spot, already on the roster.
If Neal tore up his ACL in February, that is a minimum year, or more like 16-18 month injury rehab. Thats a lot longer than PUP in 2008.
Neal is already 32 years old. If he is gone until 2009, he comes back as a 34 year old, and the Pats HAVE to be planning to start grooming a player to replace him, as a full timer,although he could be the swing for a couple of seasons.
Nick Kaczur was drafted to play RG, not tackle. that si what the scouts thought. He ended up playing RT because Neal came on; he can do it, and others couldn't. I see what the Pats are doing. They are moving Kaczur to RG his best position, and letting O'C play RT or be replaced by a older vet, patch for this season. I'll wager that they think he could excel at RG versus merely being mediocre, and getting by at RT.
Next draft, it will be time to draft an O-lineman in the second or third round to permanently solve the T problem, or if he's a LT candidate, to free Britt to go to RT, if O'C continues to fail. If Britt moves he wil have th entire offseason to beef up for RT, rather than staying too light, to back up Light. Next season they would have O'C more experienced, and available as a sub, if he hasn't taken the RT job outright.
Kaczur and Neal can duke it out for RG and also swing guard. Don't forget that Russ Hochstein is already 31 too, and he is the next guy after Neal to have some age on him.
One high draft pick and the O_line would be set throughout the rest of Brady era, with lots of continuity.
Do you agree with this analysis?
