I agree it could be more positive in the long run, because some kind of answer must be found immediately. However, it just makes me wonder about the short term. Will a rookie be effective this year? Perhaps in a year or two but what about in the mean time? See what I mean. Getting our long term answer might not solve our short term answer.

Let's just hope it does!

I said it earlier and I will repeat it now.. we have Lang whom in my opinion can handle the spot talent wise for the interim... maybe even long term.

The kid has the footwork, leverage and hand skills to do alright there IMO if they let him focus on it...

Draft your prototypical left tackle type and let them compete for the spot.. I don't see this as a cause for extreme panic.. but they will have to address the right side.. and that would be Tauscher for a 2 year deal.

---

"Ted, before we begin this discussion in earnest, I was just wondering if you would be so kind as to drop your trou, bend over, and let us get a real good look at the strength of your position in these negotiations."


"Yes, sir."







:tongue3:

I think the Packers are better without Clifton, in that they can't rely upon him as a crutch but must come up with some innovative strategies.

As for those saying we should fork over the mega-bucks for loyalty reasons, may I point out that if we don't meet his demands, he'll simply take his services elsewhere -- as well he should. These men on both sides of the negotiation table are businessmen, not amateurs, and they all know that. It's not about loyalty, it's about business. As well it should be.

---

I'm to the point of saying let Clifton go, but it is tough because at the moment the Packers don't really have an answer at left tackle other than him. But can he be marked as THE answer with the current string of injuries?

If the Redskins are really offering him that money, I wouldn't be surprised if the papers are already signed. Matching that can be just as much as a negative though as letting him go. At the moment, the Packers really don't know what they can get out of him if they keep him.

---

One of the other factors in this...before we close the book on Cliffy in GB is that fact that Clifton loves GB.. he is a low key type of guy.. so the more I think about it.. it is going to have to be a considerably better deal in Washington for him to ink there.

If they want to write the check and Chad is thinking security over the quite life.. then so be it.

5 Million to stay in isn't chump change though.. we I believe where fair in that offer.

---

I would say that's being more then fair, especially for a 3 year deal. I imagined more of a two year offer with about 3-5 million a year.

That's what I've been saying... keep him at LT and resign Tausher. If they ever get a better LT then move Lang to LG or RT.

---

At the age of 33 I think 'quality of life' is less of a factor. He probably knows he's only got 2-3 years left and this is his last pay day.

If he loves Green Bay so much he can move back there in 3 years and stay for the rest of his life after he's taken $20+ million off Dan Synder.

He's not choosing where he's going to be living for the next decade here, it's a short term gig and then he's done.

The only thing stopping him may be the fact Green Bay provide a better shot at a SB ring.

---

When the Redskins cut ten players yesterday, it reminded me of the tsunami pre-cursor where the water heads out to sea before coming rushing back to inundate the shore, except this tsunami is made of money. Peppers going to Chicago first probably has Boy Wonder throwing a temper tantrum.

I figured Cliffy at over 7.5 mil. a year. It will be interesting to me to see what the number is.

I said this will be the year of the overpaid lineman. I have no problem with Ted not going to that level with Cliffy. The only thing he is good for is keeping Rodgers healthy, relative to the other options as I see them presently. All those holds and false starts were aggravating, but I felt like this was an experienced left tackle making every effort to protect his QB's blind-side when he had lost the physical tools to do it without gaining an edge in those match-ups. Call it the "cagey veteran" factor.

That is a very expensive way to go about the business of left tackle in a football game, and I did NOT want Cliffy as a starter on this team next year. I wanted him as that very expensive-game-wise insurance, coupled with his mentoring duties.

Redskins need a right tackle and some guards too. So does Buffalo.

I really hope (semi-tongue-in-cheek-entertain-my fellow-posters-with-the-doom-and-gloom-hand-wringing notwithstanding) that we are somehow able to keep Lang at RT and/or in the mix at LG and get some real shots at a quality LT. I will go into some detail at a later time about the pluses and minuses regarding how Aaron operates/progresses, but at this time I just want to say I am not quite as freaked out about this as I may appear.

Cliffy was insurance, to me.