Packers currently talking with Clifton's agent· Page 2

doddpower
Veteran Member

15 years ago

I definitely agree that he's not worth 7 million a year but c'mon. Are we really going to depend on a rookie to start at left tackle??? That truly sounds like a terrible plan to me unless we have every intention of trading up.

I hope we at least sign some kind of LT that can half-way play because the whole having no LT thing at the moment is pretty nerve wrecking.

PS: I have a question. I know foster doesn't think this is a good idea but considering our circumstances hear me out. All we heard about for years was how Colledge was our Left Tackle of the future. Yes, he was horrible when thrown to the dogs after no preparation last season. However, does anyone think he might be a stop gap LT option with a FULL off-season to prepare? I still think he has more potential at tackle then he does guard, even if that's not saying much.

Just something I've been thinking about. I mean, we need SOME kind of option.

bozz_2006
Registered

15 years ago

#12

Gaither maybe. I imagine what would be more probably is re-signing Tausch to play RT and sticking Lang at LT this season. And look hard for an LT of the future. I really like Thompson and McCarthy, but playing musical chairs for our o-linemen is tough for me to handle.

dhazer
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#13

Packers | Offered Clifton nearly $5 million a year
Comment (0) Tweet me!
Thu, 04 Mar 2010 22:43:47 -0800

Jason Cole, of Yahoo! Sports, reports the Green Bay Packers have offered free-agent OT Chad Clifton (Packers) approximately $5 million a year. Clifton is hoping for somewhere closer to $7 million per season with at least $20 million in the first three years of any deal.

http://www.kffl.com/hotw/nfl#ixzz0hJQ2Rn4j

Just Imagine this for the next 6-9 years. What a ride it will be 🙂 (PS, Zero should charge for this)

Pack93z
Select Member

15 years ago

#14

"dhazer" wrote:

At that kind of money for that duration.. I stand behind Thompson.. let Clifton walk if someone is willing to write that check.

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

doddpower
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#15

"pack93z" wrote:

At that kind of money for that duration.. I stand behind Thompson.. let Clifton walk if someone is willing to write that check.

"dhazer" wrote:

I agree. It's obvious that his main focus at this point is getting his last payday. I would have imagined $5 million a year would have been enough to keep him in Green Bay. That's lame.

Hopefully he doesn't get what he wishes for. $5 million is more then enough for his services.

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member

15 years ago

#16

So they don't want him all that badly. Excellent. I don't want to see him in green and gold this year -- I didn't want to see him in green and gold last year. Unlike a lot of people on this board, I'm a big proponent of the "hire-slow-fire-fast" philosophy. I'd far rather take the risk of getting one less year of serviceable performance out of him than one extra year of poor performance. People like to point out that he's anchored the line for x of the Packers' last y games. That's irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. The fact is that his rate of missed time is accelerating and he's become less than reliable. The recent trends aren't good, and that's what we need to be concerned with. How many times must he hobble off the field, forcing our coaches to play yet another dangerous round of musical chairs, before fans realize it's time to move on?

doddpower
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#17

So they don't want him all that badly. Excellent. I don't want to see him in green and gold this year -- I didn't want to see him in green and gold last year. Unlike a lot of people on this board, I'm a big proponent of the "hire-slow-fire-fast" philosophy. I'd far rather take the risk of getting one less year of serviceable performance out of him than one extra year of poor performance. People like to point out that he's anchored the line for x of the Packers; last y games. That's irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. The fact is that his rate of missed time is accelerating and he's become less than reliable. The recent trends aren't good, and that's what we need to be concerned with. How many times must he hobble off the field, forcing our coaches to play yet another dangerous round of musical chairs, before fans realize it's time to move on?

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

I don't think anyone here thinks that's it's not time to move on and find a long term answer. However, many of us are just wondering what the short / long term answer may be without Clifton around. I imagine some kind of move will be made but if Chad leaves, we hardly have a left tackle. It's probably better to have a serviceable left tackle then none at all. Once again, the idea of expecting a rookie to come in an instantly start scares me.

I'm sure some moves will be made soon to sure up the position, but it's still a bit intimidating at the moment.

Pack93z
Select Member

15 years ago

#18

Clifton signing with the Skins will help us.. it will allow Washington to not focus on a tackle in the draft.. allowing another option to slide in the draft...

Cliffy wants his retirement check to be signed today.. that is fine.

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

Rockmolder
Honored Member

15 years ago

#19

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20100304/PKR01/100304145/1058/Big-push-to-hold-onto-LT-Chad-Clifton

I understand the need for a LT, but just because Clifton is the best FA LT doesn't mean Green Bay should go and WAY overspend to keep him, especially with his injury history. Take that money and target a younger RFA instead.

"RaiderPride" wrote:

OK Clifton started what? 12 games last year.

Injury History? Last time I looked he started 138 out of 143 games for the Packers over a ten year career. Ten Years of commitment to the Green and Gold has to count for something.

How does a team over pay for that type of long term commitment. I would consider it a bonus, and have the confidence that he can get the job done and pay him for it.

If the Packers were willing to give 20 Million Dollars for a self centered soon to be traitor for a long term marketing deal when he retired for the second time... They can surley have confidence in a solid vet and pay Clifton so he can retire a Packer with a well earned ring.

I think Clifton's injuries are not going to continue on in 2010

"RainX" wrote:

I think that they will.

It's these last few years that matter. Not his entire career. He's been pretty durable in his career, but after getting hit by Sapp, not even knowing if he could walk again, his legs and knees have been failing him.

I don't think that we're going to get a whole lot more than 10 games a season out of him. Maybe he'll line up in 13 games, but he'll miss enough time outside of those.

Now I'd love to have him back, but I'm not too dissapointed if he isn't. He's one of our best O-linemen on the roster, but he's not worth the $7 million. Next to that, this'll force our FO to get a replacement. They can't go with a 6th rounder now. They'll have to find someone who can protect Rodgers.

Maybe this is a positive in the long run.

dfosterf
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#20

Ted is going to have to go hat in hand if he wants Balt's LT now.

He will be waiting at the secretary's desk, she will try and wipe the smug smirk off her face, there will be raucous laughter coming from the GM's office as soon as she announces that Mr. Thompson from the Green Bay Packers is there....

He'll walk in, the room will be packed (for entertainment value)

"So, Ted, I hear you are in the market for a little protection for your franchise quarterback."

Ted---

"Err, ya, we were thinking that we might be interested in that Jared Gaither guy you got just lying around."

More raucous laughter.

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

beast (15h) : 6 days

wpr (17-Apr) : 7 days

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep

dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire

dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : That someone ... likely the agent.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that

dfosterf (16-Apr) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.

dfosterf (15-Apr) : I may have to move

dfosterf (15-Apr) : My wife just told the ancient Japanese sushi dude not enough rice under his fish

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I think a dozen is what I need

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Go fund me for this purpose just might work. A dozen nurses show up at 1265 to provide mental health assistance.

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Maybe send a crew of Angels to the Packers draft room on draft day.

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I am the Angel that gets visited.

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Visiting Angels has a pretty good reputation

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : what

Martha Careful (14-Apr) : WINNING IT, not someone else losing it. The best victory though was re-uniting with his wife

Martha Careful (14-Apr) : The manner in which he won it was just amazing and wonderful. First blowing the lead then getting back, then blowing it. But ultimately

Zero2Cool (12-Apr) : I'm guessing since the thumb was broken, he wasn't feeling it.

dfosterf (10-Apr) : Looking for guidance. Not feeling the thumb.

Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : If they knew about it or not

Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : I don't recall that he did which is why I asked.

Zero2Cool (10-Apr) : Guessing they probably knew. Did he have cast or something on?

Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : Did they know that at the time or was that something the realized afterwards?

Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : Van Ness played most of season with broken thumb

wpr (9-Apr) : yay

Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : Mark Murphy says Steelers likely to protect Packers game. Meaning, no Ireland

Zero2Cool (8-Apr) : Struggling to figure out what text editor options are needed and which are 'nice to have'

Mucky Tundra (8-Apr) : *CHOMP CHOMP CHOMP*

Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : WR who said he'd break Xavier Worthy 40 time...and ran slower than you

Mucky Tundra (2-Apr) : Who?

Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Texas’ WR Isaiah Bond is scheduled to visit the Bills, Browns, Chiefs, Falcons, Packers and Titans starting next week.

Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Spotting ball isn't changing, only measuring distance is, Which wasn't the issue.

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24