JSO doesn't like the Tausch signing.

[packers11]

Discuss...

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/87688157.html

[Brandon494]

Just something else for them to bitch about.

[Scott Campbell]

It's conditional bitching - dependent on how much money he got.

As if Ted's really going to overpay. :lol:

[red]

well, i don't like the JSO

so that should make things even

[Lurker64]

Burying Lang at the bottom of the depth chart is ridiculous. From where I sit, based on Lang's performance last year, he has a good shot at being on top of the depth chart at two different positions (LG and RT). Considering that Lang was their second best OL last year (behind Sitton) and he was a rookie, he should be starting somewhere.

[Joemailman]

Bedard misses the obvious point: TT thinks he can win it all this year, and wants to do it with a veteran offensive line. Hell, if TT hadn't signed Tauscher, Bedard would be saying TT is taking too much of a risk by just hoping that Lang or Giaco are ready to take over.

By the way, that depth chart is apparently Bedard's creation. The Packers don't have a depth chart during the off-season. I doubt it's right.

[ND72]

I actually agreed with the article. I spent a lot of time watching Tauscher late in the season, and he was average at best. He made lots of mistakes, and looked slow. People disagree with me, that's ok, everyone has an opinion...I just tend to base it on specific fact while watching the game.

Like for instance (this was on the Madison ESPN radio station) in the month of december, 92% of all pass protections were called towards Tauscher to help him out...not often you do that with a right handed QB. Again, I don't know where that number came from, so it is what it is. I thought forever that Lang would have given us more than Tauscher did, and thought that signing Tauscher was a mistake in sense unless he is a back-up.

[Lurker64]

Also, considering that this is an uncapped year, it certainly doesn't hurt the Packers to sign Tauscher to a contract for an average veteran starter and then not give him the starting job.

If the cap returns and we end up being on the hook for paying Tauscher like a starter to be a backup, then sure that was a mistake, but now? Assuming the franchise isn't really hurting for cash, it's just taking out an expensive insurance policy.

[Brandon494]

I actually agreed with the article. I spent a lot of time watching Tauscher late in the season, and he was average at best. He made lots of mistakes, and looked slow. People disagree with me, that's ok, everyone has an opinion...I just tend to base it on specific fact while watching the game.

Like for instance (this was on the Madison ESPN radio station) in the month of december, 92% of all pass protections were called towards Tauscher to help him out...not often you do that with a right handed QB. Again, I don't know where that number came from, so it is what it is. I thought forever that Lang would have given us more than Tauscher did, and thought that signing Tauscher was a mistake in sense unless he is a back-up.

He came back from a serious ACL injury and was tossed right into the action. If you don't think Tauscher helps this team then you just don't know much about football. Yea Lang looked good last season but I'd rather have Lang backing up both tackle positions. If we did not sign Tauscher and had Lang starting at RT who would we have backing up the tackle positions?

[Lurker64]

If we did not sign Tauscher and had Lang starting at RT who would we have backing up the tackle positions?

I think it would just take a reshuffling. You move your RT to LT, and you put in your next best LT.

So I would see the offensive line, without Tauscher, looking like:
Clifton/Spitz/Wells/Sitton/Lang
and if Clifton goes down:
Lang/Spitz/Wells/Sitton/Colledge (or Giacomini or Barbre.)

[Brandon494]

If we did not sign Tauscher and had Lang starting at RT who would we have backing up the tackle positions?

I think it would just take a reshuffling. You move your RT to LT, and you put in your next best LT.

So I would see the offensive line, without Tauscher, looking like:
Clifton/Spitz/Wells/Sitton/Lang
and if Clifton goes down:
Lang/Spitz/Wells/Sitton/Colledge (or Giacomini or Barbre.)

Which proves my point.... I don't want Colledge, Barbre, or Giacomini starting at RT.

[Bretsky]

Our cap is healthy; we are trying to win now and don't want to go into next year with more question marks.

The author, IMO, has never had a torn ACL nor does he have any understanding how long the true recovery time is.

Tauscher performed admirably on year one after a torn ACL injury. You are not near full strength year one. This year he will be and he will be better. The coaches, not Bedard, know who is ready to start at RT and if reports are true in that MM was lobbying for Tausch to return than there was good reason.

Nobdoy will argue or accuse me of being a TT does everything right guy; but he's been impressive this offseason and signing Tausch is one of several very solid moves.

[ND72]

I actually agreed with the article. I spent a lot of time watching Tauscher late in the season, and he was average at best. He made lots of mistakes, and looked slow. People disagree with me, that's ok, everyone has an opinion...I just tend to base it on specific fact while watching the game.

Like for instance (this was on the Madison ESPN radio station) in the month of december, 92% of all pass protections were called towards Tauscher to help him out...not often you do that with a right handed QB. Again, I don't know where that number came from, so it is what it is. I thought forever that Lang would have given us more than Tauscher did, and thought that signing Tauscher was a mistake in sense unless he is a back-up.

He came back from a serious ACL injury and was tossed right into the action. If you don't think Tauscher helps this team then you just don't know much about football. Yea Lang looked good last season but I'd rather have Lang backing up both tackle positions. If we did not sign Tauscher and had Lang starting at RT who would we have backing up the tackle positions?

Ok, so don't ever say I don't know football...I was one of the first to say Aaron Rodgers will be a good QB when everyone else was claiming him to be a bust. And one thing I know for sure, is Mark Tauscher doesn't start on any other team besides maybe Cleveland, St. Louis, Detroit, and Oakland.

[ThunderDan]

Holy Christmas!

You know if we didn't sign Tauscher, Bedwetter would be bitching that Barbre or Gio would either start or be the back-up and that isn't acceptable.

Fuck, didn't he write an article last week on how horrible our O-Line would be by losing Clifton and Tauscher in FA. :oops:

[Joemailman]

Our cap is healthy; we are trying to win now and don't want to go into next year with more question marks.

The author, IMO, has never had a torn ACL nor does he have any understanding how long the true recovery time is.

Tauscher performed admirably on year one after a torn ACL injury. You are not near full strength year one. This year he will be and he will be better. The coaches, not Bedard, know who is ready to start at RT and if reports are true in that MM was lobbying for Tausch to return than there was good reason.

Nobdoy will argue or accuse me of being a TT does everything right guy; but he's been impressive this offseason and signing Tausch is one of several very solid moves.

Besides the injury, Tauscher didn't really have much practice before being inserted into the lineup. He's past his prime, but there's a pretty good chance he'll be better in 2010 than in 2009.

[Lurker64]

Which proves my point.... I don't want Colledge, Barbre, or Giacomini starting at RT.

Barbre I'll grant you. If he doesn't turn it around this year, he's gone. Giacomini, I have never seen anything from either positive or negative, so I dunno. But Colledge? Colledge was awful at LT, and was a wreck overall this year, but has played well at RT in spot duty in places.

You also have to keep in mind that there's approximately a 300% chance that Thompson will draft at least one person with the ability to start at tackle eventually in this league. That guy might be fine for spot duty at RT too.

[vince]

Bedard criticizing a Ted Thompson move. What a complete shocker. In other equally unbelievable twists, the sky is up, the sun rose this morning, and Skin criticized Bigby.

[mission]

Brandon touched on it a bit with the injury stuff.

Same thing with Clifton... neither of those guys actually had time to train, run, lift, etc and their bodies just weren't physically prepared. it's easy to predict both of our tackles continuing on the same parabola of their decline but I could see them both stepping it up this year and surprising a lot of people.

I don't have much to base it on besides the fact that these guys can go about a normal routine throughout the offseason, but we could be in for a pleasant surprise from a protection standpoint. Wouldn't surprise me at all to see Lang come on at LG and really solidify the line while we groom a couple new draft choices at tackle.

[RashanGary]

I understand the point, but disagree. Tasuch might not be great, but he is a serviceable starter and makes it possible to have Lang as a backup. If we lost Tascher and Lang was starting, I'd be really concerned about our backup tackle situation. Now, I'm not nearly as concerned.

If a top tier OL drops to us, we could easily trade Colledge or Spitz and move Lang to LG.

It's an insurance policy. If we don't draft a great lineman, then it makes sure we have depth this year. If we do draft a great lineman, then we can unload one of our other lineman. There are a lot of teams looking for serviceable staring lineman and if the draft goes our way, we'll have an extra one to trade.

[Brandon494]

I actually agreed with the article. I spent a lot of time watching Tauscher late in the season, and he was average at best. He made lots of mistakes, and looked slow. People disagree with me, that's ok, everyone has an opinion...I just tend to base it on specific fact while watching the game.

Like for instance (this was on the Madison ESPN radio station) in the month of december, 92% of all pass protections were called towards Tauscher to help him out...not often you do that with a right handed QB. Again, I don't know where that number came from, so it is what it is. I thought forever that Lang would have given us more than Tauscher did, and thought that signing Tauscher was a mistake in sense unless he is a back-up.

He came back from a serious ACL injury and was tossed right into the action. If you don't think Tauscher helps this team then you just don't know much about football. Yea Lang looked good last season but I'd rather have Lang backing up both tackle positions. If we did not sign Tauscher and had Lang starting at RT who would we have backing up the tackle positions?

Ok, so don't ever say I don't know football...I was one of the first to say Aaron Rodgers will be a good QB when everyone else was claiming him to be a bust. And one thing I know for sure, is Mark Tauscher doesn't start on any other team besides maybe Cleveland, St. Louis, Detroit, and Oakland.

My bad wasn't trying to take a shot at you but since you brought it up....


ND72 wrote: I put my word on that, and you can save it and show it to me if i'm wrong, but I won't be...Brady Quinn will be a Franchise.

[digitaldean]

If a top tier OL drops to us, we could easily trade Colledge or Spitz and move Lang to LG.

The way Colledge is going (skipping OTAs) he is wearing out his welcome VERY fast.

[swede]

I actually agreed with the article. I spent a lot of time watching Tauscher late in the season, and he was average at best... I thought forever that Lang would have given us more than Tauscher did, and thought that signing Tauscher was a mistake in sense unless he is a back-up.

He came back from a serious ACL injury and was tossed right into the action. If you don't think Tauscher helps this team then you just don't know much about football.

He might be wrong, but ND knows a hell of a lot about football.

[RashanGary]

Without Tauscher, we have no reliable backup at either tackle position. With Tauscher, we now have a reliable backup at both positions (lang). That, alone, makes it a good move.

I'm still hoping for a great tackle prospect early, but now we're not in trouble if we don't get one.

[Brandon494]

Without Tauscher, we have no reliable backup at either tackle position. With Tauscher, we now have a reliable backup at both positions (lang). That, alone, makes it a good move.

I'm still hoping for a great tackle prospect early, but now we're not in trouble if we don't get one.

+1

Thats all I was trying to say and if you can't understand how Tauscher helps this team then you can see why I would make the mistake to think he didn't know much about football.

[pbmax]

I actually agreed with the article. I spent a lot of time watching Tauscher late in the season, and he was average at best. He made lots of mistakes, and looked slow. People disagree with me, that's ok, everyone has an opinion...I just tend to base it on specific fact while watching the game.

Like for instance (this was on the Madison ESPN radio station) in the month of december, 92% of all pass protections were called towards Tauscher to help him out...not often you do that with a right handed QB. Again, I don't know where that number came from, so it is what it is. I thought forever that Lang would have given us more than Tauscher did, and thought that signing Tauscher was a mistake in sense unless he is a back-up.

He came back from a serious ACL injury and was tossed right into the action. If you don't think Tauscher helps this team then you just don't know much about football. Yea Lang looked good last season but I'd rather have Lang backing up both tackle positions. If we did not sign Tauscher and had Lang starting at RT who would we have backing up the tackle positions?
Let's take a deep breath. I believe ND is a former collegiate player AND a current coach. Of all of us, he should know what to look for in a lineman. In fact, I believe he was a lineman. That is different from projecting a college QB to the pros.

Two, I agree with the article and sentiment that Tauscher wasn't the complete solution and looked best when compared to the disaster of pass blocking that was Barbre.

Three, I don't think that depth chart was meant to be taken literally. I think the reason Lang is in green is that no one knows for certain where he will line up in camp. I have serious doubts he will be at RG or center and he will only be at LT if McCarthy has no other choices there. Look for him at RT and LG.

Four, starter money sounds like a decent principal. But Brady Poppinga is making serious money and he is behind Brad Jones and Matthews. Chillar may be outearning other LBs and he plays nickel only. And Donald Lee is outearning Finley, but I doubt the snaps will reflect that next year.

Fifth, the concept that leads to a legitimate question is how much COULD they have paid Tauscher and gotten him to return. He is probably the depth chart starter now, contract or no, based on last year. But Barbre and Giacomini (or a rookie) would not have to move far to unseat him.

Bedard is conflating two facts. The Packers paid that much because they had to ensure his return (as Bretsky has said, he may have been the best tackle left in UFA after Clifton signed). But while it confirms that they do not know what they have with their youth at Right Tackle, it does not preclude one of them beating him out.

[Brandon494]

I actually agreed with the article. I spent a lot of time watching Tauscher late in the season, and he was average at best. He made lots of mistakes, and looked slow. People disagree with me, that's ok, everyone has an opinion...I just tend to base it on specific fact while watching the game.

Like for instance (this was on the Madison ESPN radio station) in the month of december, 92% of all pass protections were called towards Tauscher to help him out...not often you do that with a right handed QB. Again, I don't know where that number came from, so it is what it is. I thought forever that Lang would have given us more than Tauscher did, and thought that signing Tauscher was a mistake in sense unless he is a back-up.

He came back from a serious ACL injury and was tossed right into the action. If you don't think Tauscher helps this team then you just don't know much about football. Yea Lang looked good last season but I'd rather have Lang backing up both tackle positions. If we did not sign Tauscher and had Lang starting at RT who would we have backing up the tackle positions?
Let's take a deep breath. I believe ND is a former collegiate player AND a current coach. Of all of us, he should know what to look for in a lineman. In fact, I believe he was a lineman. That is different from projecting a college QB to the pros.

Two, I agree with the article and sentiment that Tauscher wasn't the complete solution and looked best when compared to the disaster of pass blocking that was Barbre.

Three, I don't think that depth chart was meant to be taken literally. I think the reason Lang is in green is that no one knows for certain where he will line up in camp. I have serious doubts he will be at RG or center and he will only be at LT if McCarthy has no other choices there. Look for him at RT and LG.

Four, starter money sounds like a decent principal. But Brady Poppinga is making serious money and he is behind Brad Jones and Matthews. Chillar may be outearning other LBs and he plays nickel only. And Donald Lee is outearning Finley, but I doubt the snaps will reflect that next year.

Fifth, the concept that leads to a legitimate question is how much COULD they have paid Tauscher and gotten him to return. He is probably the depth chart starter now, contract or no, based on last year. But Barbre and Giacomini (or a rookie) would not have to move far to unseat him.

Bedard is conflating two facts. The Packers paid that much because they had to ensure his return (as Bretsky has said, he may have been the best tackle left in UFA after Clifton signed). But while it confirms that they do not know what they have with their youth at Right Tackle, it does not preclude one of them beating him out.

I understand he was a former player and is now currently a coach and while I respect him as a fellow Packer fan I just have not read anything he has posted to make me think he is a good talent evaluator.

Also he stated that when Tauscher came back that he made mistakes and was slow. Well thats going to happen when you come back from a ACL injury mid way in the season without any off-season training. For what Tauscher had to go thru he did a damn good job at RT and I see no reason why anyone would be against bringing him back.

[RashanGary]

It also has potential to be a mistake. If he gets injured, mistake. If Lang AND one of the other guys really pans out, then it's a mistake.

If only one of Lang and (Giacomini/Barbre) pan out, then it was a good signing IMO.

The Packers are a pretty good team. It's nice to know they have a little depth on the OL now and have a little time to make sure they get the right players at tickle moving forward.

[mission]

lol you guys are tough on brandon ...

it's not about if tauscher has lost a step or this or that... starter money or not, if he's not the most consistent RT we have on the team then he wont start and will provide depth.

our team is better with him on it ... we saw that last year.

i also saw tausch struggle at times... give him a full offseason to do what he does instead of gimping around with a fucked up ACL and we'll probably see him closer to form.

basing his play entirely on what we saw last season just isn't telling of the whole story. a football guy of any level of experience playing/coaching should know that. no offense to anyone, it's good conversation, but there are two ways to look at it.

(ive been an all conference quarterback for the WI HS football team of the 90s and coach QBs @ Jeff Trickey camps every summer ... doesn't make my word gold over anyone elses... no one cared when i said AR was THE MAN ;)

[Brandon494]

It also has potential to be a mistake. If he gets injured, mistake. If Lang AND one of the other guys really pans out, then it's a mistake.

If only one of Lang and (Giacomini/Barbre) pan out, then it was a good signing IMO.

The Packers are a pretty good team. It's nice to know they have a little depth on the OL now and have a little time to make sure they get the right players at tickle moving forward.

Giacomini and Barbre have shown nothing to prove they can handle playing RT in the NFL which make this the right signing. Also while I think Lang is our future at RT its no way of knowing if he'll have a sophmore slump. Although the most important factor to me is that both MM and Rodgers wanted both Clifton and Tauscher back.

[RashanGary]

I agree, Brandon, I don't think they have any confidence in Barbre or Giacomini and that is why Taush was signed.

They're going to give the two prospects that have done nothing so far a chance to stick, but they're not going to bet on it, not for a starters salary. They'd rather take Tausher, take the sure thing and have a quality prospect that they actually do believe in backing him up (lang).


I'm with Brandon, it's a good move. It could go the other way, but I think it has a lot better chance of turning out for the better than worse.

And I agree with ND. Tasuch is just serviceable. He's no better at RT than Colledge is at LG, but I'd rather have serviceable than a big gaping hole and I think that is what this signing says. It says serviceable is a hell of a lot better than one injury putting Barbre or Giacomini on the field. Now they have a little more time to develop the right guy. I really hope it works out soon because we don't have much time.

[Pugger]

Both TT and MM cited Tauscher's lockerroom/veteran presence and that makes us a better team on and off the field.

[bobblehead]

Burying Lang at the bottom of the depth chart is ridiculous. From where I sit, based on Lang's performance last year, he has a good shot at being on top of the depth chart at two different positions (LG and RT). Considering that Lang was their second best OL last year (behind Sitton) and he was a rookie, he should be starting somewhere.
I got scott wells on hold....he wants to talk with you.

[bobblehead]

I actually agreed with the article. I spent a lot of time watching Tauscher late in the season, and he was average at best. He made lots of mistakes, and looked slow. People disagree with me, that's ok, everyone has an opinion...I just tend to base it on specific fact while watching the game.

Like for instance (this was on the Madison ESPN radio station) in the month of december, 92% of all pass protections were called towards Tauscher to help him out...not often you do that with a right handed QB. Again, I don't know where that number came from, so it is what it is. I thought forever that Lang would have given us more than Tauscher did, and thought that signing Tauscher was a mistake in sense unless he is a back-up.

He came back from a serious ACL injury and was tossed right into the action. If you don't think Tauscher helps this team then you just don't know much about football. Yea Lang looked good last season but I'd rather have Lang backing up both tackle positions. If we did not sign Tauscher and had Lang starting at RT who would we have backing up the tackle positions?

Ok, so don't ever say I don't know football...I was one of the first to say Aaron Rodgers will be a good QB when everyone else was claiming him to be a bust. And one thing I know for sure, is Mark Tauscher doesn't start on any other team besides maybe Cleveland, St. Louis, Detroit, and Oakland.

My bad wasn't trying to take a shot at you but since you brought it up....


ND72 wrote: I put my word on that, and you can save it and show it to me if i'm wrong, but I won't be...Brady Quinn will be a Franchise.

Did you cut that quote off right before the word KILLER?

[vince]

The premise of the article is:

the Packers' re-signing of Tauscher to be a starter ... doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
His "big" reason for this is:

the Packers are no closer to finding their [Tauscher and Clifton] replacements now than they were three years ago.
Thompson hasn’t found Tauscher’s replacement (shame on him), so bringing him back is a mistake. Huh? With that logic, Bedard should shoot himself in the head if he wants to live a long and healthy life.

And is Bedard really arguing that Thompson and the coaches don’t have a clue as to whether Barbre, Giaco and Lang have demonstrated enough ability and experience to render Tauscher's services unneeded? What does he think they’ve been observing and studying on tape every freaking day of practice and games last season and beyond?

The fact that they are bringing Tauscher back speaks directly to how they feel about the wisdom of entering the year with the benefit of his experience and ability, even if his ability is declining. The argument that Tauscher is likely to come back better this year due to a full offseason of work with a healthy knee has merit. One of his competitors may have a great offseason and preseason of work and give the coaches reason to play them, but even if that occurs, that says nothing about whether it would be a good or bad idea to have an experienced backup like Tauscher available in case that doesn’t happen or if there is an injury.

Ulterior agendas make for senseless arguments.

[Fritz]

I was thinking the same thing, Vince...I was looking at the article, trying to get it down to Bedard's central claim. And you got it: it was a luxury to sign Tauscher for starter money...because Thompson has been unable to find a replacement for Tauscher.

Agreed, so far, that Thompson has not found left and right tackle replacements, though he may have found one on the right in Lang.

But to use that for the basis of an article as to why Tauscher's money was a luxury?

Uh...yeah.

[pbmax]

i also saw tausch struggle at times... give him a full offseason to do what he does instead of gimping around with a fucked up ACL and we'll probably see him closer to form.

basing his play entirely on what we saw last season just isn't telling of the whole story. a football guy of any level of experience playing/coaching should know that. no offense to anyone, it's good conversation, but there are two ways to look at it.

(ive been an all conference quarterback for the WI HS football team of the 90s and coach QBs @ Jeff Trickey camps every summer ... doesn't make my word gold over anyone elses... no one cared when i said AR was THE MAN ;)
I cared mission. I really did. :D

And I do not doubt that some of Tauscher's struggles were part of the recovery from injury. But he had also shown signs of his pass blocking slipping the year before. And he has struggled with blocking for the run for a while. Its hard to know what is on this side of the injury for Tauscher. He might recover fully and still slip due to age alone.

[RashanGary]

That was funny, Vince. It was kind of long winded, so I guess I missed how ridiculous his main point was. That's Dard-head for ya. FF has coined a new term "Dard". It's used similar to tard.

With Colledge, Spitz, Sitton and Lang, it appears Thompson has found 4 starters in 4 years. Now we need the 5th.

I'll agree that Thompson has failed in finding 5 good young replacements in 5 years, but I don't know, how many GM's get stuck with that task when inheriting the team. If we end up finding a replacement for Clifton in this years draft, we'll need to find a starter every two years and that won't be such a nasty task. It's like failing at making a 100,000 in your first year of employment. Sure, you failed at it, but you had a few disadvantages to overcome.

I still think people forget what a mess Thompson inherited. It's like blaming Bill Parcels for not getting a QB in Miami. When you walk in and it's falling apart, sometimes it takes a little time to get everything in order, not to mention every team in the NFL has one position that is borderline. Pittsburgh, Arizona, NO, Indy. They all have one issue or another. And if the OL is Thompsons biggest failure, I don't know, I don't think it's too bad. It might be a compliment to Thompson that even his worst is pretty good.

The writer of this article is a total Dard, literally.

[ND72]

I actually agreed with the article. I spent a lot of time watching Tauscher late in the season, and he was average at best. He made lots of mistakes, and looked slow. People disagree with me, that's ok, everyone has an opinion...I just tend to base it on specific fact while watching the game.

Like for instance (this was on the Madison ESPN radio station) in the month of december, 92% of all pass protections were called towards Tauscher to help him out...not often you do that with a right handed QB. Again, I don't know where that number came from, so it is what it is. I thought forever that Lang would have given us more than Tauscher did, and thought that signing Tauscher was a mistake in sense unless he is a back-up.

He came back from a serious ACL injury and was tossed right into the action. If you don't think Tauscher helps this team then you just don't know much about football. Yea Lang looked good last season but I'd rather have Lang backing up both tackle positions. If we did not sign Tauscher and had Lang starting at RT who would we have backing up the tackle positions?

Ok, so don't ever say I don't know football...I was one of the first to say Aaron Rodgers will be a good QB when everyone else was claiming him to be a bust. And one thing I know for sure, is Mark Tauscher doesn't start on any other team besides maybe Cleveland, St. Louis, Detroit, and Oakland.

My bad wasn't trying to take a shot at you but since you brought it up....


ND72 wrote: I put my word on that, and you can save it and show it to me if i'm wrong, but I won't be...Brady Quinn will be a Franchise.

Did you cut that quote off right before the word KILLER?


hahahaha....well I didn't say what franchise!

[ND72]

and by the way, I never said we SHOULDN'T resign Tauscher, I just didn't believe it was as important as most think. Even in 08-09 before Tauscher got injured, he was very average.

[mission]

i also saw tausch struggle at times... give him a full offseason to do what he does instead of gimping around with a fucked up ACL and we'll probably see him closer to form.

basing his play entirely on what we saw last season just isn't telling of the whole story. a football guy of any level of experience playing/coaching should know that. no offense to anyone, it's good conversation, but there are two ways to look at it.

(ive been an all conference quarterback for the WI HS football team of the 90s and coach QBs @ Jeff Trickey camps every summer ... doesn't make my word gold over anyone elses... no one cared when i said AR was THE MAN ;)
I cared mission. I really did. :D

And I do not doubt that some of Tauscher's struggles were part of the recovery from injury. But he had also shown signs of his pass blocking slipping the year before. And he has struggled with blocking for the run for a while. Its hard to know what is on this side of the injury for Tauscher. He might recover fully and still slip due to age alone.

:lol:

You could be right and personally I didn't (have to) pay much attention to Tauscher before he was injured so maybe the form I claim he'll regain won't even be enough to justify the spending. Someone made a good point about this being a luxury signing and that's kind of the way I'm looking at it. We have the money to do it and the guy is a long time Packer who's been nothing but class. Plus his little brother did some sales for my company right out of college so I'm a bit biased. :D

[packerbacker1234]

Reasons to bring Taucher back

1. Reliability
2. Continuity on the line. Not having to worry about your "starting" tackles is a luxory many teams wish they had.
3. Great locker room presence and leader
4. Homegrown, fan favorite... makes everyone happy

Negative?

T.J. Lang most likely isn't starting, though he provides a solid backup at almost every position... and you need that as OL do randomly go down for a game or two. Just the nature of the game.


I mean, I get the "at some point you need to see what the other guys can do" mentality, but were also not a team rebuilding: We are a legit playoff contendor that if we fix a few spots on defense could be a legit Super Bowl competitor next season. Bringing back your tackle duo of what, 10 years, helps solidify the line. T. J. Lang may be as good as Tauch is right now, but Lang can also play multiple positions.

Lets say spitz gets hurt again... or isn't the same as he use to be (which wasn't even that good... his career has been almost as bad as colleges) I would not be opposed to Lang at LG. I am also not opposed to Lang being our top backup, able to play 4 positions. You can't underestimate that value.

In short, I am ok if this means Tauch is starting. It closes questions at the starter spot. Does this solve the future need of a LT and maybe a RT if we put Lang somewhere else? Of course not, but for 2010 and 2011 it's not about "the future", it's about winning now. There is still time to groom a new LT behind clifton and I think the Lang situation will play out better when we figure out what we are doing at LG, because putting college back there again would be a mistake... and I have never been sold on spitz.

[ThunderDan]

The real issue is:

Are there other RTs out there that are an improvement over Tauscher? If we can't bring that player in, we need Tauscher on this team.

[sharpe1027]

The real issue is:

Are there other RTs out there that are an improvement over Tauscher? If we can't bring that player in, we need Tauscher on this team.

I agree. Basically, the Packers just signed the best two FA tackles available. Might as well take advantage of the uncapped year and get known quantities.

Who cares if either one of them ends up as a well-paid backup? Worst case is Tauscher starts because he is still better than the other guys (which means the signing was necessary). Best case, one of the young guys is better than Tausch, which is a good thing all-around.

[CaliforniaCheez]

I'm starting to dislike Bedard. Not as much as the whining McGinn but Bedard is working on it.

Tauscher was with the Packers before Bedard left Miami to write about the Packers.

Tauscher went many years without ever receiving a penalty.

He is a good Wisconsin guy who has never complained and a very capbable player.

Last season was his worst as he stepped in cold right off rehab.

He is far more reliable physically now than Clifton.

He was coming off injury when he signed his last contract and has missed out on the big money his whole career. If he gets more in the uncapped year it can make up a little for many years when he was underpaid.

He is better than Clifton and certainly less penalized than Clifton. I hope he is finally paid more than Clifton.

[get louder at lambeau]

Bedard should shoot himself in the head

^Moral of the story right there.^

Do it, Greg. Do it.

[pbmax]

In todays blog Bedard simplifies his argument down to "Tauscher shouldn't be handed the starting job". So that 2500 word epic from yesterday really could have been whittled down.

[sharpe1027]

In todays blog Bedard simplifies his argument down to "Tauscher shouldn't be handed the starting job". So that 2500 word epic from yesterday really could have been whittled down.

In another equally newsworthy tidbit, Bedard explains that running backs should try not to fumble the ball. Next week, he is offering his argument on eating yellow snow.

[RashanGary]

Isn't it ironic, only a month ago, the JS passed off that crap interview to their readers. Inside that interview was a line of questions that read more like a interrogation than sports interview and in that interrogation, Ted Thompson was grilled for not having a better backup at LT. In that interview, he was questioned repeatedly for not having signed a veteran last offseason to shore up the depth.

And now Dard has the lack of intelligence to complain about the Packers deepening their OL by signing Tausher. Come on, guys, it's one or the other.


If we don't sign Tasucher, our only good tackle backup is starting and we are just crossing our fingers, hoping for a rookie that can play. The Packers spent a 4th round pick on Barbre. It looks like he's not panning out. They spent a 5th on Giacomini. It looks like he's not panning out. Why the hell should they let Tauscher go? So they can move their only quality backup tackle into a starting spot and then get demolished after one injury.

What a Dard. 4th and 5th round picks flop more than they pan out Dard. Are you advocating Ted blindly stand buy a couple of mid to late round picks just becuase he drafted them? Yeah, that would have been a great idea, Dard.

[packrulz]

Isn't it ironic, only a month ago, the JS passed off that crap interview to their readers. Inside that interview was a line of questions that read more like a interrogation than sports interview and in that interrogation, Ted Thompson was grilled for not having a better backup at LT.

And now Dard has the lack of intelligence to complain about the Packers deepening their OL by signing Tausher. Come on, guys, it's one or the other.


If we don't sign Tasucher, our only good tackle backup is starting and we are just crossing our fingers, hoping for a rookie that can play. The Packers spent a 4th round pick on Barbre. It looks like he's not panning out. They spent a 5th on Giacomini. It looks like he's not panning out. Why the hell should they let Tauscher go? So they can move their only quality backup tackle into a starting spot and then get demolished after one injury.

What a Dard.
I think M3 threw Barbre in as a starter before he was ready, he might just need more time. TT must have seen something when he drafted Barbre and Giacomini. Everyone considers them to be busts but it must be tough playing tackle against Jared Allen and the Williams boys, I'm still holding out hope they'll be much better this year.

T/G Allen Barbre
Missouri Southern St.
6'4" - 300 lbs.
A consensus All-American, All-MIAA and All-Region first-team selection in 2006, Barbre started 33 of 37 career contests (32 at LT). In his 4-year career, he was credited with 254 knockdown blocks and registered 10 tackles on special teams.
(from Pittsburgh with No. 192 for No. 112)
OT Breno Giacomini
Louisville
6'7" - 303 lbs.
All-Big East Conference second-team choice by The NFL Draft Report. Recorded 78 knockdowns and ten touchdown-resulting blocks while starting all twelve games at right tackle.

Giacomini actually alternated back-and-forth between tight end and tackle for his first three years at Louisville, but the Packers definitely see the 6-foot-7, 300-pounder as a tackle, perhaps on either side. Finding long-term replacements for veteran tackles Mark Tauscher and Chad Clifton comes more to the forefront with each passing year.

"We'll play him both at right and left and see how he handles both sides," Campen said. "Being a tight end and having to flip left to right, he's used to that, as Tony was, so we'll see how he does.

"He possesses a high ability to learn. You watch him in his first games all the way to the end, and he improved steadily throughout each season."

In his full season as a starter at tackle last year, Giacomini started all 12 games at right tackle and allowed four sacks and two pressures on 491 pass plays.

[mission]

Tauscher base salary: 1.8 mil
roster bonus: 1.4

hardly scary starter money... seems like another nice packer friendly deal with an option for the second year

[pbmax]

Tauscher base salary: 1.8 mil
roster bonus: 1.4

hardly scary starter money... seems like another nice packer friendly deal with an option for the second year
If that is all this year, 3.2 million is pretty good cash. Not top of the line by any means, but I can see that as median for starters. But nothing extraordinary.

[pbmax]

Isn't it ironic, only a month ago, the JS passed off that crap interview to their readers. Inside that interview was a line of questions that read more like a interrogation than sports interview and in that interrogation, Ted Thompson was grilled for not having a better backup at LT. In that interview, he was questioned repeatedly for not having signed a veteran last offseason to shore up the depth.

And now Dard has the lack of intelligence to complain about the Packers deepening their OL by signing Tausher. Come on, guys, it's one or the other.


If we don't sign Tasucher, our only good tackle backup is starting and we are just crossing our fingers, hoping for a rookie that can play. The Packers spent a 4th round pick on Barbre. It looks like he's not panning out. They spent a 5th on Giacomini. It looks like he's not panning out. Why the hell should they let Tauscher go? So they can move their only quality backup tackle into a starting spot and then get demolished after one injury.

What a Dard. 4th and 5th round picks flop more than they pan out Dard. Are you advocating Ted blindly stand buy a couple of mid to late round picks just becuase he drafted them? Yeah, that would have been a great idea, Dard.
I think its clear now, with today's clarification, that he meant the team SHOULD want Tauscher as a backup. Bedard lost his marbles when he heard it was starter's money.

Normally, T2 wouldn't be caught in such a trap, he would pass on it and trust the youth. Clearly, having a second shot at the same target he has decided not to fully trust those two young RTs again. It also would seem to be a clear indication that he feels this team should be going deep into the playoffs, as I think you could persuasively argue that sacks (and all those responsible for them) cost the Packers a shot at the Division and a home playoff game. While he publicly doesn't link the two, Thompson has said several times since the season ended that he thought they were going deep in the playoffs.

[pbmax]

Isn't it ironic, only a month ago, the JS passed off that crap interview to their readers. Inside that interview was a line of questions that read more like a interrogation than sports interview and in that interrogation, Ted Thompson was grilled for not having a better backup at LT.

And now Dard has the lack of intelligence to complain about the Packers deepening their OL by signing Tausher. Come on, guys, it's one or the other.


If we don't sign Tasucher, our only good tackle backup is starting and we are just crossing our fingers, hoping for a rookie that can play. The Packers spent a 4th round pick on Barbre. It looks like he's not panning out. They spent a 5th on Giacomini. It looks like he's not panning out. Why the hell should they let Tauscher go? So they can move their only quality backup tackle into a starting spot and then get demolished after one injury.

What a Dard.
I think M3 threw Barbre in as a starter before he was ready, he might just need more time. TT must have seen something when he drafted Barbre and Giacomini. Everyone considers them to be busts but it must be tough playing tackle against Jared Allen and the Williams boys, I'm still holding out hope they'll be much better this year.
The story making the rounds is that Thompson was pushing to replace Tauscher with the young players, not a hard argument to make given his injury. McCarthy was said to want Tauscher back quicker. But I don't think Ted could have been convinced even by his own HC to get a vet backup at RT last year.

The REAL question I have, is why on earth wasn't Lang devoted to RT for longer in camp? He started there in camp and when he showed he had something, they switched him to the left side. I can see wanting to eliminate Moll, but the coaches had to know quickly that Giacomini wasn't ready and Barbre would need a backup.

Is it possble that Giacomini status as leading the league as a gameday inactive has more to do with playing just one position than the fact that he isn't ready?

[Gunakor]

The real issue is:

Are there other RTs out there that are an improvement over Tauscher? If we can't bring that player in, we need Tauscher on this team.

T.J. Lang, perhaps. But we won't find out if they're just going to name Tausch the starter. That's the thing about refusing to move forward. You never know what you have in the cupboard.

[CaliforniaCheez]

Some people forget how many years it took Marco Rivera to become a starter.

Wahle as a rookie got blasted by the press at LT. After a couple of years he was praised at LG.

Do you expect freshman to start at the collegic level? How about sophmores? Why not?

Let's be reasonable.

[packrulz]

Isn't it ironic, only a month ago, the JS passed off that crap interview to their readers. Inside that interview was a line of questions that read more like a interrogation than sports interview and in that interrogation, Ted Thompson was grilled for not having a better backup at LT.

And now Dard has the lack of intelligence to complain about the Packers deepening their OL by signing Tausher. Come on, guys, it's one or the other.


If we don't sign Tasucher, our only good tackle backup is starting and we are just crossing our fingers, hoping for a rookie that can play. The Packers spent a 4th round pick on Barbre. It looks like he's not panning out. They spent a 5th on Giacomini. It looks like he's not panning out. Why the hell should they let Tauscher go? So they can move their only quality backup tackle into a starting spot and then get demolished after one injury.

What a Dard.
I think M3 threw Barbre in as a starter before he was ready, he might just need more time. TT must have seen something when he drafted Barbre and Giacomini. Everyone considers them to be busts but it must be tough playing tackle against Jared Allen and the Williams boys, I'm still holding out hope they'll be much better this year.
The story making the rounds is that Thompson was pushing to replace Tauscher with the young players, not a hard argument to make given his injury. McCarthy was said to want Tauscher back quicker. But I don't think Ted could have been convinced even by his own HC to get a vet backup at RT last year.

The REAL question I have, is why on earth wasn't Lang devoted to RT for longer in camp? He started there in camp and when he showed he had something, they switched him to the left side. I can see wanting to eliminate Moll, but the coaches had to know quickly that Giacomini wasn't ready and Barbre would need a backup.

Is it possble that Giacomini status as leading the league as a gameday inactive has more to do with playing just one position than the fact that he isn't ready?
I don't know, I have a hard time believing that TT would tell M3 who to start. Taucher was hurt, so was Giacomini, Lang was a rookie, and Barbre was probably having better practices.

[Fritz]

Part of the difficulty in all this is the time it seems to take for many offensive linemen to develop. Barring injury, if a running back doesn't show anything by year two or three at the outside, he's clearly a bust. If a defensive lineman stays healthy but can't get it done by year two or three, he's a bust.

If a quarterback struggles in his third year, he's a bust.

Obviously, there are some exceptions, but on the whole I think it's true. But for offensive linemen, it seems to take longer in many cases, so you end up hanging on to guys for longer, unsure as to whether they'll make it in the end.

[Kiwon]

JSO may not have liked the signing but you can believe that A-Rod did.

[ThunderDan]

The real issue is:

Are there other RTs out there that are an improvement over Tauscher? If we can't bring that player in, we need Tauscher on this team.

T.J. Lang, perhaps. But we won't find out if they're just going to name Tausch the starter. That's the thing about refusing to move forward. You never know what you have in the cupboard.

Who said they were refusing to move forward? They needed a starting caliber RT and now they have one. That isn't to say that Lang doesn't move ahead in training camp. But I feel much more comfortable knowing we have a 10 year vet with 100s of starts on the roster than Lang, Barbre and Gio alone.

[CaptainKickass]

Part of the difficulty in all this is the time it seems to take for many offensive linemen to develop. Barring injury, if a running back doesn't show anything by year two or three at the outside, he's clearly a bust. If a defensive lineman stays healthy but can't get it done by year two or three, he's a bust.

If a quarterback struggles in his third year, he's a bust.

Obviously, there are some exceptions, but on the whole I think it's true. But for offensive linemen, it seems to take longer in many cases, so you end up hanging on to guys for longer, unsure as to whether they'll make it in the end.

I haven't said this out loud yet, but I really feel like the Packers Offensive Line coaching staff has a problem with developing players.

Now, if you couple that with Teets and the scouting staff having what appears to be a weakness when it comes to evaluating Offensive Line talent... you need to sign both Cliffy and Taush.

Anyone else feel like we can scout and acquire talent everywhere else except the O line?

[sharpe1027]

I haven't said this out loud yet, but I really feel like the Packers Offensive Line coaching staff has a problem with developing players.

Now, if you couple that with Teets and the scouting staff having what appears to be a weakness when it comes to evaluating Offensive Line talent... you need to sign both Cliffy and Taush.

Anyone else feel like we can scout and acquire talent everywhere else except the O line?

Chicken or the egg problem. Are the linemen bad because they do not have the right talent to succeed or because they aren't being developed properly.

I think the best measure may be whether or not the Packer's unsuccessful O-linemen suddenly become successful elsewhere. Meredith and Moll come to mind. Unfortunately, the jury's still out on both.

[Iron Mike]

Anyone else feel like we can scout and acquire talent everywhere else except the O line?

You're conveniently forgetting that at the time of M3's switch to the ZBS, one of the benefits of the change was supposed to be the fact that the system allowed you to draft "smaller, more athletic" OLinemen rather than the "big, road grader" type that the majority of teams draft, and that you could acquire them in the later rounds of the draft....so TT drafted Colledge, Spitz and Moll in '06 and Barbre in '07....which were at the time they were drafted, were labeled as "smaller, more athletic" types. Now...4 years down the road and everyone is bemoaning the fact that TT has to re-sign Clifton and Tauscher because our current OL sucks.

Maybe it has more to do with the fact that TT was drafting players that "fit the system" and M3, Philben and Campen failed to coach them up, rather than TT sucking at drafting OL.....

[CaptainKickass]

Anyone else feel like we can scout and acquire talent everywhere else except the O line?

You're conveniently forgetting that at the time of M3's switch to the ZBS, one of the benefits of the change was supposed to be the fact that the system allowed you to draft "smaller, more athletic" OLinemen rather than the "big, road grader" type that the majority of teams draft, and that you could acquire them in the later rounds of the draft....so TT drafted Colledge, Spitz and Moll in '06 and Barbre in '07....which were at the time they were drafted, were labeled as "smaller, more athletic" types. Now...4 years down the road and everyone is bemoaning the fact that TT has to re-sign Clifton and Tauscher because our current OL sucks.

Maybe it has more to do with the fact that TT was drafting players that "fit the system" and M3, Philben and Campen failed to coach them up, rather than TT sucking at drafting OL.....

Nope - not forgetting that at all. I've factored in your valid points to ask the above question, plus I'm also including the "no-name" O-Line guys TT went and got for Sherman's last year. (Can't even remember their names....Klemm maybe? & someone else...) They were also unspectacular at best.

"Acquiring talent" includes the Draft, Free Agency, and looking under unturned stones.

It's either inability to get O-line talent, or inability to develop the O-line talent. Or both.

Right now - I'm feeling its both.

[RashanGary]

I don't know if the Packers have been so bad with OL talent.

Colledge - serviceable starter
Spitz - serviceable starter
Sitton - good starter
Lang - appears to be serviceable starter or better


We land a LT and we have 5 solid players up front.

[Deputy Nutz]

I don't know if the Packers have been so bad with OL talent.

Colledge - serviceable starter
Spitz - serviceable starter
Sitton - good starter
Lang - appears to be serviceable starter or better


We land a LT and we have 5 solid players up front.


Sitton is the only one that stands out to me as a player that not only has talent but translates it to the position. He is also the only one that is asked to play only one position, and amazingly enough he is growing into a very successful football player. With the four fellas you mentioned it is hard to call any of them a bust, maybe Colledge who was a second round pick, but he has started almost every game for the Packers in the last 4 years.

Last year the offensive line suffered as a whole due to the lack of any consistency, with Tauscher missing the first half of the year, Clifton missing several games and pieces of a couple more. The biggest problem I see on this offensive line is if and when Clifton gets hurt the Packers are currently in a position to have to turn to a rookie to protect Aaron Rodgers blind side, and with Jared Allen, Julius Peppers, and Kyle VandenBosch in the Division it would make me a little nervous.

Again the Packers could have TJ Lang fill in at RT, LT, LG, but then I think you are doing him a deservice stretching him too thin. I don't mind Guards and Right Tackles learning multiple positions, but my philosophy is that you have a starting left tackle, and reserve left tackle. Groom a rookie to take the reigns in 2011. Instead of using the draft to fill holes, use it to stock your stables in future years especially at tackle where there are two aging veterans.

[RashanGary]

I understand what you're saying, Nutz. It's certainly more ideal.

However, there are what? 20 starting caliber LT's in teh NFL. We have one, barely. After him, we have what appears to be a serviceable LT backup in Lang. I'm really hoping that a good LT prospect makes it to us at some point early in the draft.

If it doesn't happen though, I think we almost have to practice Lang at LT. I'd prefer your scenerio, but we don't know if that's possible yet.


IF we dont' find a LT in this draft, Lang almost has to backup both tackle spots and Spitz backs up all interior spots. I'm OK with that, although I'm really hoping for your scenerio too.

Best case:

Clifton/Promising high draft pick
Colledge/Spitz
Wells/Spitz
Sitton/Spitz
Tasucher/Lang

Hopefully it works out ideal, but there is no guarantee it will.

[3irty1]

I'm glad Tauscher is back but I agree with ND and maybe others that it doesn't mean a whole lot. Tausch is a class act and a fine pass protector and will probably start which probably means another year of struggling to run off tackle. He left a lot to be desired in a zbs RT even before his knee injury which imo didn't seem to slow him down or considerably change his play. The guy is a technician, he's not particularly athletic or by any means a road grater but his kung fu is strong and he'll keep A-Rod up right. If College is indeed a douche and plotting to holdout then I could see our OL go something like this:

LT: Clifton/Lang
LG: Lang/Spitz
C: Spitz/Wells/EDS
RG: Sitton/Spitz
RT: Tauscher/Gio/Barbre

This puts Lang at what is believed to be his most natural position on the OL and a good looking interior line. Last year at this time with Tausch out the job seemed to be Gios to lose which he did by getting Matt Flynn killed in preseason and also by getting hurt. Then Barbre came in and sucked but by the time Gio was healthy Barbre's play had improved quite a bit. I hope for the sake of the OL that Gio can make big strides once again this offseason to show us why Meredith was the one who went to the PS and not Gio. I also will not count out the possibility of a rookie beating out Tauscher this year should some stud LT of the future fall to us.

[GoPackGo]

Tauscher will be 19 months removed from his ACL surgery when training camp begins next summer and should be even better than he was this season.

The Packers do have other options at right tackle with second-year man T.J. Lang and third-year player Breno Giacomini.

Allen Barbre, who started seven games at that spot last year, failed miserably and figures to be a long shot to make the roster.

The Packers know they have to improve the O line or what should be a promising season could be lost. I have to believe TT will make some steps in the right direction without screwing the Packers in any way.

[Brandon494]

I'm glad Tauscher is back but I agree with ND and maybe others that it doesn't mean a whole lot. Tausch is a class act and a fine pass protector and will probably start which probably means another year of struggling to run off tackle. He left a lot to be desired in a zbs RT even before his knee injury which imo didn't seem to slow him down or considerably change his play. The guy is a technician, he's not particularly athletic or by any means a road grater but his kung fu is strong and he'll keep A-Rod up right. If College is indeed a douche and plotting to holdout then I could see our OL go something like this:

LT: Clifton/Lang
LG: Lang/Spitz
C: Spitz/Wells/EDS
RG: Sitton/Spitz
RT: Tauscher/Gio/Barbre

This puts Lang at what is believed to be his most natural position on the OL and a good looking interior line. Last year at this time with Tausch out the job seemed to be Gios to lose which he did by getting Matt Flynn killed in preseason and also by getting hurt. Then Barbre came in and sucked but by the time Gio was healthy Barbre's play had improved quite a bit. I hope for the sake of the OL that Gio can make big strides once again this offseason to show us why Meredith was the one who went to the PS and not Gio. I also will not count out the possibility of a rookie beating out Tauscher this year should some stud LT of the future fall to us.

I believe that is the best O-line rotation we have, no Colledge I think is the best part about it. :lol: Only change I would make is that I believe a rookie will take eitehr Gio or Barbre spot