too.

I corrected a much-perpetuated and (obviously) widely-held belief at the time when I caught it. The fact that the Packers and the NFL retained his listed weight at 316 on the very day he was asked about it and stated that HE HAD JUST BEEN WEIGHED at 307 on April 26, 2009 should convince everyone by now that these players -probably all of them-- have their weight mis-represented for a myriad of reasons.

There WAS some controversy/discrepancy about this at the time of the draft, WHICH IS WHY HE WAS ASKED. His college listed him at 316 for his pro day, he played in an all-star game and was listed at 312, but SUBSEQUENT to those events, his college REVERTED his listed weight to 307...his playing weight- when he was drafted. This raised eyebrows, again, because he was one vote shy and was not invited to the combine.

Look for yourself:
(And a brief primer on why it might matter, according to a fella by the name of Sir Isaac Newton)

The question that SHOULD be asked is where did the 316 come from. Some "book cooking" , or "finger on a scale", something at his pro-day, and it has stuck. Again, he wasnt at the combine, so he didnt get weighed. He played at 307 in college and his college said he weighed 307 when he was drafted, and so did he. Many of the sites that track players statistics caught that not so little revelation and currently list him at the weight that both he and his alama mater said he was.





http://www.emueagles.com/news/2009/4/26/FB_0426090257.aspx 

Eastern Michigan University on draft day:








http://www.historyforkids.org/ 



Put another way, 316 going more faster is more better than 307 going more faster. He is pretty quick, and if you don't think 9 lbs matter, ask yourself this:

If he really weighed 316 instead of the 307, do you think he would have been at that combine last year? Do you think he would have lasted until the 4th round? I personally think he would have been there, and I also personally think he would have been drafted earlier. If you don't think it matters, just go ask Charles Brown and his agent THIS year. Lang's "claim to fame" is his versatility. At 307 and stubby arms that goes completely bye-bye. At 316, he is a better on paper RT, G, bigman C and a somewhat atypical LT.

I'm over it now, I heard he came in at 329 this year, all [strike]22 pounds[/strike] [strike]17 pounds[/strike] 13 pounds pure muscle mass, along with his arms growing an amazing 3 inches in length, making this discussion the forum equivalent of moot.

The teams (and individual players/agents) lie. They put whatever weight they think sounds good, plus or minus. One small example is the fact that not a single prospect at the OT position weighed the same as their listed pre-combine weight in this year's combine weigh-in. You would think that at least one would. See if they change any weights this year on the Packers.com roster. I say they might, but it will probably have nothing to do with the truth of the matter.

It might not matter, but what the hell else is there to bitch about during the off-season? --Plus I can throw in a piece of trivia.

According to this article Link  published in 2006, the average weight of NFL linemen has increased 62 pounds from the AFL-NFL merger in 1970 to 2006...Oh, and a fella by the name of F.J. Lang reportedly weighed as much as 1187 lbs during his lifetime, and T.J. Lang is still a right tackle, possibly a left guard, and the Tausch signing was a very good thing, imo. :tongue3: