...and another +1 for the context in which it was used :tongue3:
I think a lot of us share the exact same concerns.
My position is that there is no way we can stand pat with what we have.
No way.
I guess the closest we come to the opposite of that view is Pack93z's argument that we will be good with Lang at LT.
I see options in the middle, Lang as a RT try--and a good try, especially in the context that even when he gets beat Aaron can see him coming...
Just because I have a bet with Z doesn't mean I'm not high on Lang. I'm just not willing to accept that it would be a good gamble to have him ojt at LT. I will call that a terrible gamble, and in the further context of Lang as an excellent gamble at RT, imo---We have a legitimate shot at improving our line considerably if we can just find a really good option for LT.
Pack93z told me Jamon Meredith was the shit when we drafted him. (While I was screaming Duke Robinson) :pottytrain2:
It might take multiple shots at it, dependent upon the route Ted takes.
"Misses" at LT can be real assets on the rest of that line, don't discount that factor.
A small part of me wonders if the rest of the NFCN might start jumping at other available o linemen opportunities from our team like hyenas on a carcass. Addition by subtraction, if you will. Not saying that would be a primary motive, but if it were "close", I'd factor it, if I were them.
Make your QB comfy, make the other QB not comfy. Seems like there is a lot of match-up trouble heading our way.
Free agency day is hand-wringing day in Green Bay.