JSO doesn't like the Tausch signing.

[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?