Ohrnberger

[RayClay]

I agree that there is no reason to call Ohrnberger a bust. He was a 4th round draft choice. he was very, very unlikely to be cut. The only 4th rounder I recall being cut was Kareem Brown in an aweful draft. He didn't do well enough to beat out Connolly as the GameDay backup OG/C. He didn't need to DO ANYTHING in games to show progression. He needed to impress his coaches in practices.

So, we come into the 2010 season.

A) Connolly is back and seems to have inside track at a roster spot a a backup OG and C.
B) LeVoir is back and has the inside track as a backup OT.
B) Bussey, who didn't make the 2009 roster, is back, and has a chance as a backup LT.
C) Ohrnberger is back and is competing with the rest for a backup interior line position.
D) We drafted the 3rd best center in the draft, Larsen, who is the mix as a backup center.
E) We drafted Welch who could be the 4th OT (instead of Bussey) if Kaczur moved to LG.

LOCKS
Light, Kaczur, Koppen, Neal, Vollmer

ALMOST LOCKS (as solid inexpensive backups)
Connolly, LeVoir

PICK TWO
Mankins, Ohrnberger, Bussey, Larsen, Welch
Let the competition begin!

BOTTOM LINE
Ohrnberger could make the roster, or not. In any case, I would expect him to be given every opportunity to make the roster, and even to replace Connolly if he is able. His future is anywhere from being cut to being a Game Day backup and starter if there is an injury.

As fans, we do NOT KNOW ANYTHING about how Ohrnberger is rated by the coaches. We MAY get glimpses of how the coaches feel when writers like Reiss don't have him on their 53 man rosters.

BTW, we shouldn't be shocked if Mankins and Ohrnberger are on the 53, and the three late rounders are waived, with the hope of getting them to Practice Squad. That would simply mean that Ohrnberger has progressed as expected, or at least good enough to beat out those who were not on the 53 man squad last year.

Ohrnberger played a number of snaps while Connolly played fullback.

What exactly did we expect Ohrnberger to do, beat out Mankins or Neal?

 

[Deus Irae]

This "Connolly is solid" stuff must have happened at some post-season camp, because he wasn't solid during the season. I'm sure the Jets would love to see him in the lineup against them again, though.

 

[signbabybrady]

This "Connolly is solid" stuff must have happened at some post-season camp, because he wasn't solid during the season. I'm sure the Jets would love to see him in the lineup against them again, though.

I think this goes to relativity.

If you are calling him a starter he is not solid but if you are calling him a back up who can come in and start and not be absolutely awful than he is solid.


Of course the Jets would like to see back ups in the line up. Of course it would be nice to have back ups who are just as good as the starters.

 

[Deus Irae]

I think this goes to relativity.

If you are calling him a starter he is not solid but if you are calling him a back up who can come in and start and not be absolutely awful than he is solid.


Of course the Jets would like to see back ups in the line up. Of course it would be nice to have back ups who are just as good as the starters.

If the best the Patriots can do for backups is "not be absolutely awful", it's time for new blood acquiring and coaching them.

 

[Ring 6]

If the best the Patriots can do for backups is "not be absolutely awful", it's time for new blood acquiring and coaching them.

Yes, but thats not what it was.
Connolly played 420 snaps, and 323 of them were in the 5 games he played most of. In those games were ran for 122 yards a game, allowed only 4 sacks, went 4-1 and averaged 23.2 ppg.
He also played 20+ plays in the Indy, Jax and Houston games which would increase those numbers quite a bit.

He was capable. Can you do better as a backup G, yes. Can you do worse, yes.

If BB felt he were terrible he would not have traded the prior #3 G, Russ Hochstein to Denver on 8/25 at the end of camp, and the offense plays about as well with him in there as it did when he wasn't. That is a capable backup. I don't expect him to ever be more than that, but quoting that comment is really a misrepresentation.

 

[Deus Irae]

Yes, but thats not what it was.
Connolly played 420 snaps, and 323 of them were in the 5 games he played most of. In those games were ran for 122 yards a game, allowed only 4 sacks, went 4-1 and averaged 23.2 ppg.
He also played 20+ plays in the Indy, Jax and Houston games which would increase those numbers quite a bit.

He was capable. Can you do better as a backup G, yes. Can you do worse, yes.

If BB felt he were terrible he would not have traded the prior #3 G, Russ Hochstein to Denver on 8/25 at the end of camp, and the offense plays about as well with him in there as it did when he wasn't. That is a capable backup. I don't expect him to ever be more than that, but quoting that comment is really a misrepresentation.

I didn't find him to be capable at all. I found him to be borderline awful, and a major part of the problem on the right side when Neal went down was that the already struggling Kaczur now had to try covering for Connolly as well as himself. Also, quoting the person's words back was not a misrepresentation at all.

If you want to talk about misrepresentation, you could look to how you're framing the games that Connolly was in. He started 4 games, weeks 11,13,14 and 15. In those 4 games, the Patriots played a soft schedule comprising the Jets, Dolphins, Panthers and Bills, yet scored more than 21 points only in the Jets game (Thank you Mark Sanchez!), and averaged better than 4 yards per carry only in the Panthers game.

Also, 1 of 4 games with him starting yielded more than 21 points, while 9 of 12 games with him not starting yielded more than 21 points. That's not the offense playing about as well with him in there as when he wasn't.

 

[Ring 6]

I didn't find him to be capable at all. I found him to be borderline awful, and a major part of the problem on the right side when Neal went down was that the already struggling Kaczur now had to try covering for Connolly as well as himself. Also, quoting the person's words back was not a misrepresentation at all.

If you want to talk about misrepresentation, you could look to how you're framing the games that Connolly was in. He started 4 games, weeks 11,13,14 and 15. In those 4 games, the Patriots played a soft schedule comprising the Jets, Dolphins, Panthers and Bills, yet scored more than 21 points only in the Jets game (Thank you Mark Sanchez!), and averaged better than 4 yards per carry only in the Panthers game.

Also, 1 of 4 games with him starting yielded more than 21 points, while 9 of 12 games with him not starting yielded more than 21 points. That's not the offense playing about as well with him in there as when he wasn't.

Quoting them back is a misrepresentation in that it is not a fact that their assessment is accurate.

I used the 5 games that he played almost all of them which also included the other Miami game.
We scored 116 points in those 5 games.
We ran for 122 a game. We averaged about 4, which is what we were.

Not sure why you wouldnt include the Miami game when he played 42 snaps??????

In any event, we ran the ball about as well, we didn't allow any more sacks, and we scored about 3 points less a game when he was in there and we were 4-1.
I don't see how we were damaged.
He is a backup, there is supposed to be a dropoff.
Not sure what you think backup players do in the NFL but they typically don't perform like starters.

 

[Ring 6]

I didn't find him to be capable at all. I found him to be borderline awful, and a major part of the problem on the right side when Neal went down was that the already struggling Kaczur now had to try covering for Connolly as well as himself. Also, quoting the person's words back was not a misrepresentation at all.

If you want to talk about misrepresentation, you could look to how you're framing the games that Connolly was in. He started 4 games, weeks 11,13,14 and 15. In those 4 games, the Patriots played a soft schedule comprising the Jets, Dolphins, Panthers and Bills, yet scored more than 21 points only in the Jets game (Thank you Mark Sanchez!), and averaged better than 4 yards per carry only in the Panthers game.

Also, 1 of 4 games with him starting yielded more than 21 points, while 9 of 12 games with him not starting yielded more than 21 points. That's not the offense playing about as well with him in there as when he wasn't.

We also should be accounting for the fact that many of those games were weather affected right?

 

[Deus Irae]

Quoting them back is a misrepresentation in that it is not a fact that their assessment is accurate.

Given that "their assessment" was not in play when I quoted back, and my assessment was, there was no misrepresentation.

I used the 5 games that he played almost all of them which also included the other Miami game.
We scored 116 points in those 5 games.
We ran for 122 a game. We averaged about 4, which is what we were.

Yes, you framed the info, just as I noted.

Not sure why you wouldnt include the Miami game when he played 42 snaps??????

I included his starts. It's pretty simple to figure out, really.

In any event, we ran the ball about as well, we didn't allow any more sacks, and we scored about 3 points less a game when he was in there and we were 4-1.

As I noted, 9 of 12 vs. 1 of 4, and that's against a group with no strong teams in it. It's not even close, no matter how you try to frame it.

I don't see how we were damaged.
He is a backup, there is supposed to be a dropoff.
Not sure what you think backup players do in the NFL but they typically don't perform like starters.

If they perform as poorly as Connolly did, you look for replacements.

 

[Deus Irae]

We also should be accounting for the fact that many of those games were weather affected right?

Why? This isn't a 2007 scenario here.

 

[Ring 6]

Why? This isn't a 2007 scenario here.

Weather only affected scoring and NFL games were lower scoring in the snow in 2007?

 

[Ring 6]

Given that "their assessment" was not in play when I quoted back, and my assessment was, there was no misrepresentation.



Yes, you framed the info, just as I noted.



I included his starts. It's pretty simple to figure out, really.



As I noted, 9 of 12 vs. 1 of 4, and that's against a group with no strong teams in it. It's not even close, no matter how you try to frame it.




If they perform as poorly as Connolly did, you look for replacements.

I'll drop the misrepresentation comment because I did not explain it well.

So we can agree that when Connolly played, the team was not as good.
The wheels didn't come off. We won 4 of 5 games. (I don't agree that the guideline of who affected the outcome of the game is only who played the first snap)
And we both can frame the stats to make our argument look better.

I got about what I would expect to get from a backup G in a cap era.
It would seem you expect there to be no dropoff when a starter is out, and thats fine, I just disagree.

 

[Deus Irae]

So we can agree that when Connolly played, the team was not as good. The wheels didn't come off. We won 4 of 5 games.

Yes, the team was clearly not as good when Connolly played, despite facing a weak part of the schedule during that time. The record is irrelevant. What's relevant is how well the offense played. As you noted, it was clearly not as good.

(I don't agree that the guideline of who affected the outcome of the game is only who played the first snap)

I never made that claim. However, for ease of comparison, breaking up a game when an o-lineman didn't play it all is not the way to go, and crediting a non-starter with the start is obviously not the way to go either. Therefore, you credit him for his starts. It's pretty basic, really.

And we both can frame the stats to make our argument look better.

The team scored fewer points, and failed to get above 21 points 3 games out of 4. The team rushed for fewer than 4 YPA in 3 games out of 4, while averaging 4.1 YPA over the course of the season. What you did was credit the running game for volume stats (pure yards), and minimize a significant drop in scoring. I don't consider pointing these facts out in response to your posts to be "framing". I consider it to be a response to your framing.

I got about what I would expect to get from a backup G in a cap era. It would seem you expect there to be no dropoff when a starter is out, and thats fine, I just disagree.

I don't expect there to be no dropoff. Were that the case, the "starter" tag would be irrelevant. I do, however, expect better than Connolly supplied.

 

[IcyPatriot]

Re: Ohrenbereger

In my opinion they don't want to risk losing Larsen until they see him for a year, so practice squad is not an option for him. Since Ohrnberger apparently is already dealing with an injury, he seems to be a better candidate than Larsen for IR than Larsen in allowing the team to get a longer look at him before making a decision.

Absolutely ... and I think Larsen will be here for a few years before they even think of moving on from him.

I'm expecting Larsen to help out his year ... just a hunch ... he has the tools he just needs the time.

 

[Deus Irae]

Weather only affected scoring and NFL games were lower scoring in the snow in 2007?

As a general rule, weather can't be applied to an individual player the way it can to a team. Now, some players demonstrate issues (Aikman with a wet football, for example), but it takes a large enough data set to figure all of that out. We do not have that in this instance.

Also, as an aside, I didn't notice the Patriots having lower scoring in the snow against the Titans, which would be a snow game in the same year.

 

[Ring 6]

As a general rule, weather can't be applied to an individual player the way it can to a team. Now, some players demonstrate issues (Aikman with a wet football, for example), but it takes a large enough data set to figure all of that out. We do not have that in this instance.

Also, as an aside, I didn't notice the Patriots having lower scoring in the snow against the Titans, which would be a snow game in the same year.

I don't think an exhaustive analysis is required to conclude that games played in the snow are lower scoring.

 

[Deus Irae]

I don't think an exhaustive analysis is required to conclude that games played in the snow are lower scoring.

NE: 59
Tenn: 0


In the snow, last season.

 

[Ring 6]

Yes, the team was clearly not as good when Connolly played, despite facing a weak part of the schedule during that time. The record is irrelevant. What's relevant is how well the offense played. As you noted, it was clearly not as good.

And no one would expect the team to be better with backups playing.
But the record is relevant. First because if his play didn't cost us games, what is the relevance of the dropoff, and second because winning matters more than points scored.
The running game was almost exactly the same. The pass proection was almost exactly the same. You are hung up on a magic # of more than 21 being good and 20 or 21 being bad. Thats silly, and thats 2/3 of your point argument. I will accept that Connlly could be the difference between 22 and 20 or 21 points, as I already indicated we socred about a FG less.
The other 1/3 of your argument was the Buffalo game in the blizzard when we ran 34 times and passed 23 completing 11. That is an anomoly.

I never made that claim. However, for ease of comparison, breaking up a game when an o-lineman didn't play it all is not the way to go, and crediting a non-starter with the start is obviously not the way to go either. Therefore, you credit him for his starts. It's pretty basic, really.

Ease f comparison is not the same as accuracy.
I agree your way is easier, I wouldnt have to go look and see if he actually played 1 play or 80.
My way is more accurate in depicting his play.
I wasn't debating which stats were easier to accumulate, I was debating which stats were more representative of his play.

The team scored fewer points, and failed to get above 21 points 3 games out of 4. The team rushed for fewer than 4 YPA in 3 games out of 4, while averaging 4.1 YPA over the course of the season. What you did was credit the running game for volume stats (pure yards), and minimize a significant drop in scoring. I don't consider pointing these facts out in response to your posts to be "framing". I consider it to be a response to your framing.

I don't expect there to be no dropoff. Were that the case, the "starter" tag would be irrelevant. I do, however, expect better than Connolly supplied.

And I consider when the backup RG is in, and we win 4 of 5, the running game is identically productive, the pass blocking is identically productive, and we score 3 points less per game, to be a fine result for having my backuip on the field.

Hell, we were 6-5 in the game he didnt play the majority of the snaps.

Exactly what is it that suffered?

 

[Ring 6]

NE: 59
Tenn: 0


In the snow, last season.

Wow, what can I say you found 1 game in MID OCTOBER where ONE of the teams scored a lot. That must prove that every game ever played in the snow is high scoring.

Your just being difficult now. You only have to look at all of the late season Patriots-Bills game, as well as 9 out of 10 snow games ever to know teams score fewer points when it snows.

 

[Deus Irae]

Wow, what can I say you found 1 game in MID OCTOBER where ONE of the teams scored a lot. That must prove that every game ever played in the snow is high scoring.

Your just being difficult now. You only have to look at all of the late season Patriots-Bills game, as well as 9 out of 10 snow games ever to know teams score fewer points when it snows.

I'm not being difficult at all. I pointed out problems with trying to evaluate an individual player without a large enough data set, and I noted that the very season you are pointing to had a high scoring snow game.

Basic stuff