People are discounting how good Lang is at already.. that is fine.. I rest on what I have seen out of the kid to date.. and think he might not be a franchise left tackle.. but he could man the position just fine.
"pack93z" wrote:
I actually like Lang a lot, too. I'm not quite as confident re: him playing LT as you are, but I won't be at all surprised if he's starting opening day somewhere on the line.
I'm still arguing for the "overkill" approach, though: IMO there are only four players who have demonstrably shown themselves as worthy of a roster space on a the squad: Sitton (as a starter); Wells (as a backup, possibly starter); maybe Tauscher (as a backup); and Lang. All the rest, IMO, need to prove that they are worthy in 2010 of a spot.
Now, I won't be surprised if some of the others stick (especially, e.g., Clifton), but I would hope that whoever ends up on the roster, both as starters and as backups, are going to do better than all those others did last year.
Lang is, in my opinion, the *only* player on last year's roster who should get a position this year based in part on "potential". The others only get a spot because they have performed at a sufficiently high level last year (Sitton, maybe Wells, maybe maybe Tauscher) in training camp and in preseason games better than the alternatives.
And I want enough bodies and alternatives in camp so that the only way the Colledges and Spitzes et al make the roster is because they have a kick-ass, take-no-prisoner's camp. Not just because they suck less than the alternatives.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)