vs. Vikings - Lang or Clifton?

[denverYooper]

I'll take a double shot of Lang with a wedge of Quinn Johnson, and a Clifton back, just in case the shot makes me puke in my mouth.

Just add QJ in the mix and punch him in the mouth a few time right away, eh? Interesting idea...

[packerbacker1234]

I never understood why everyone is so high on Lang. He's had one game against one of the worst teams in all of football.

So, lets go with a player who has never even been tested verse a battle tested vet where we know what were going to get.

This is such a easy call. If Clifton is healthy, and that is a big if, you go with clifton. Saying Lang is better at anything then clifton is laughable right now. It's one game, and horrible competition at that. He gets better competition at practice then he did against the browns.

[denverYooper]

I never understood why everyone is so high on Lang. He's had one game against one of the worst teams in all of football.

So, lets go with a player who has never even been tested verse a battle tested vet where we know what were going to get.

This is such a easy call. If Clifton is healthy, and that is a big if, you go with clifton. Saying Lang is better at anything then clifton is laughable right now. It's one game, and horrible competition at that. He gets better competition at practice then he did against the browns.

I agree they go with Clifton if he's healthy.

Although Cliffy didn't exactly look stupendous against the Lions who, although not as crappy as the Browns, are still pretty crappy.

[Gunakor]

I never understood why everyone is so high on Lang. He's had one game against one of the worst teams in all of football.

So, lets go with a player who has never even been tested verse a battle tested vet where we know what were going to get.

This is such a easy call. If Clifton is healthy, and that is a big if, you go with clifton. Saying Lang is better at anything then clifton is laughable right now. It's one game, and horrible competition at that. He gets better competition at practice then he did against the browns.

Lang didn't get called for any penalties I don't think. Clifton can't get through a game without being called for at least 2 or 3, whether it's holding, false start, illegal formation, or whatever. Plus he's just not that good anymore IMO, he hasn't looked all that great all season even when he was healthy.

You're right, we don't know what Lang can do against a guy like Allen, but we know what Clifton can do against Allen and it ain't much. So let's see what the kid can do.

[Packers4Ever]

Lang. Only way to get better is to keep playing.

I view Clifton and Tauscher as mentors to the new Tackles now and that's about it. Both of these guys were very good in their prime and can teach the youngsters a lot and speed up their maturity.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mentors? Of course they can help with teaching but I think it would be a slap in the faces of 2 men who handled the line at one time, that's why they've been brought back in. I'm sure MM has been working with them too, Cliffy and Tauscher certainly aren't going to be dropped into play with no prior practice. Doesn't mean MM booked them for all 4 quarters! Let the kid get his track shoes on and warm up a little.

[denverYooper]

Who thought we'd be having this discussion about our LT situation? By all accounts, Lang was supposedly a G prospect. He played LT at EMU, sure, but reports from practice had him getting backup reps behind Colledge at LG.

But then Colledge, the original backup plan at LT, went down when he was filling in for Cliffy. Lang obviously showed some moxie at LT, enough so that now he's played a fair amount of snaps and showed enough to merit a debate about who should start there. At the very least he's a hell of a swing backup and someone you feel good about getting in the game.

With the Wells/Spitz debate at C and Tausch being brought up to speed, I feel quite a bit better about our line than I have all year. Next Sunday, obviously, will be a huge test.

[packerbacker1234]

I never understood why everyone is so high on Lang. He's had one game against one of the worst teams in all of football.

So, lets go with a player who has never even been tested verse a battle tested vet where we know what were going to get.

This is such a easy call. If Clifton is healthy, and that is a big if, you go with clifton. Saying Lang is better at anything then clifton is laughable right now. It's one game, and horrible competition at that. He gets better competition at practice then he did against the browns.

Lang didn't get called for any penalties I don't think. Clifton can't get through a game without being called for at least 2 or 3, whether it's holding, false start, illegal formation, or whatever. Plus he's just not that good anymore IMO, he hasn't looked all that great all season even when he was healthy.

You're right, we don't know what Lang can do against a guy like Allen, but we know what Clifton can do against Allen and it ain't much. So let's see what the kid can do.

Again, what is all this hate on cliffy. Look at the sack chart: Cliffy was solid till Cincy, and even against cincy before he got hurt he did or was partially responsbile for 2 sacks. That guy is a beast - college then gave up 3 or 4 more.

Look, Clifton has been hurt this year, that doesn't suddenly means he sucks. He was pretty solid last season, and a stud the season before. He hasn't "been" healthy for really any game outside of Chicago - and he was pretty damn good there. About the only bright spot on the whole line that game.

He was "ok" against the lions, but yeah he wasn't good. I don't think he was really healthy, and came back a game too soon.

If Clifton is 100%, not 80, or 90, he should be starting. I am 100% positive that Cliffy, healthy, gives up zero sacks against the browns too.

And we don't know what he can do against allen? Lets see: 3 games, 2 of them he was SHUT OUT. CLiffy has had 3 games against allen, and competely eliminated him from 2 of the 3. He destroyed him one game last year, and did the same in 2007 for hte only game the pack faced him.

Clifton has a pretty good history there against allen. So, CLiffy can't do much against him eh? 2 of 3 games - no sacks from allen. Hmm... not much eh?

EDIT: As for the flags, give me a break. The guy has been one the least penalized guys ont he line for 7 or 8 years now. The browns game was an anomoly. The flags on illegal formation are complete crap. On one of them he said so himself he was there, and film showed he was lined up properly.

As for holding: It's ticky tack. Every linemen is holding on every play, essentially. He was just targeted since he had 2 illegal formation penalties on him.

So: Lang is stud because he was awesome against the browns, and Clifton sucks because he has played hurt all year.

Makes sense to me.

[retailguy]

cliffy. lang against the browns doesn't really prove anything. though, he gets points for not giving up a sack in his first start from me. that's a good thing.

[Brandon494]

Lang future might not be at LT but he is already a better run blocker than Clifton. I'd start Lang and have Clifty ready to go if he struggles.

[Gunakor]

I never understood why everyone is so high on Lang. He's had one game against one of the worst teams in all of football.

So, lets go with a player who has never even been tested verse a battle tested vet where we know what were going to get.

This is such a easy call. If Clifton is healthy, and that is a big if, you go with clifton. Saying Lang is better at anything then clifton is laughable right now. It's one game, and horrible competition at that. He gets better competition at practice then he did against the browns.

Lang didn't get called for any penalties I don't think. Clifton can't get through a game without being called for at least 2 or 3, whether it's holding, false start, illegal formation, or whatever. Plus he's just not that good anymore IMO, he hasn't looked all that great all season even when he was healthy.

You're right, we don't know what Lang can do against a guy like Allen, but we know what Clifton can do against Allen and it ain't much. So let's see what the kid can do.

Again, what is all this hate on cliffy. Look at the sack chart: Cliffy was solid till Cincy, and even against cincy before he got hurt he did or was partially responsbile for 2 sacks. That guy is a beast - college then gave up 3 or 4 more.

Look, Clifton has been hurt this year, that doesn't suddenly means he sucks. He was pretty solid last season, and a stud the season before. He hasn't "been" healthy for really any game outside of Chicago - and he was pretty damn good there. About the only bright spot on the whole line that game.

He was "ok" against the lions, but yeah he wasn't good. I don't think he was really healthy, and came back a game too soon.

If Clifton is 100%, not 80, or 90, he should be starting. I am 100% positive that Cliffy, healthy, gives up zero sacks against the browns too.

And we don't know what he can do against allen? Lets see: 3 games, 2 of them he was SHUT OUT. CLiffy has had 3 games against allen, and competely eliminated him from 2 of the 3. He destroyed him one game last year, and did the same in 2007 for hte only game the pack faced him.

Clifton has a pretty good history there against allen. So, CLiffy can't do much against him eh? 2 of 3 games - no sacks from allen. Hmm... not much eh?

EDIT: As for the flags, give me a break. The guy has been one the least penalized guys ont he line for 7 or 8 years now. The browns game was an anomoly. The flags on illegal formation are complete crap. On one of them he said so himself he was there, and film showed he was lined up properly.

As for holding: It's ticky tack. Every linemen is holding on every play, essentially. He was just targeted since he had 2 illegal formation penalties on him.

So: Lang is stud because he was awesome against the browns, and Clifton sucks because he has played hurt all year.

Makes sense to me.

Clifton isn't gonna be 100% healthy the rest of the season. So where do you go from there?

Clifton has been one of the most penalized members of that OL for 2 seasons now. Both he and Tauscher were guilty of more than their fair share of penalties last season and I remember us having discussions about that during some of the game threads. Maybe they are ticky-tack, but the point is they were called. They weren't last weekend. Maybe you're right and Lang was just lucky, or maybe I'm right and Lang played a cleaner game. And didn't allow a sack on top of it.

I'm ready to move on from Clifton. I'm ready to see if Lang can get the job done. If he gave any reason to doubt whether he could get the job done maybe I'd feel differently. But he played a pretty good game yesterday, and I'm ready to see if he can do it again. Clifton is done IMO. Time to pass the torch.

[pbmax]

Who thought we'd be having this discussion about our LT situation? By all accounts, Lang was supposedly a G prospect. He played LT at EMU, sure, but reports from practice had him getting backup reps behind Colledge at LG.

Lang's preseason was weird. In the first week, he saw snaps at RT while there were reps and space with Breno still recovering and he also played guard.

Shortly after everyone realized the kid could play this year and was bright enough to learn multiple positions, he stops playing at RT and goes guard exclusively. But who was he going to unseat there? He had to beat two out of Sitton, Colledge and Spitz.

Odd they didn't let him try RT longer. Maybe KYPack, Nutz, ND72 or Waldo have a guess as to what happened.