Re: Mega-Merge: 2010 Free Agency Rumors and Reports Thread
 

[quote=Ruhskins;670011]So Rabach would play guard?[/quote]

I think he could play guard, but center seems to be his natural position.

Re: Mega-Merge: 2010 Free Agency Rumors and Reports Thread
 

I've heard the new coaches are high on Rhineheart

Re: Mega-Merge: 2010 Free Agency Rumors and Reports Thread
 

Let's just hope they know how to spell his name

Re: Mega-Merge: 2010 Free Agency Rumors and Reports Thread
 

[quote=Mattyk;670019]Let's just hope they know how to spell his name[/quote]

hahaha...

Re: Mega-Merge: 2010 Free Agency Rumors and Reports Thread
 

[quote=Ruhskins;670011]So Rabach would play guard?[/quote]

He did with the Ravens so it's possible

Re: Mega-Merge: 2010 Free Agency Rumors and Reports Thread
 

Suisham looking for work again:

[url=http://www.rotoworld.com/Content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=NFL&id=3529]Shaun Suisham[/url]

Re: Mega-Merge: 2010 Free Agency Rumors and Reports Thread
 

[quote=Ruhskins;669983]I meant a marquee UFA, sort of what Jason Brown was last year. I could be wrong, but I don't think we've ever gone after a young talented offensive lineman in the last couple of seasons. Except for Dockery, we always seemed to pick up old guys to patch things up.[/quote]

Because we're always patching things up is the main reason why we have no stability on the offensive line as we speak. There's not a player on the line who we can look to and say he'll be a mainstay for us for a few years to come. The one unit on the team that requires the most continuity and consistency is the unit that's constantly in flux, it explains in many ways the lack of success.

We can't build an offensive line in one off-season but you have to start somewhere. Continuing to patch is not my idea of building, you build with youth and a continued infusion of youth. At the rate we're going, every year we'll need a new/or different player to replace an old and often injured one who himself is old and often injured. The only way you win is bet you lose.

Re: Mega-Merge: 2010 Free Agency Rumors and Reports Thread
 

We could also sign both Rabach and Mawae for depth purposes at C, knowing that neither one is the long-term solution.

Re: Mega-Merge: 2010 Free Agency Rumors and Reports Thread
 

[quote=Mattyk;670025]He did with the Ravens so it's possible[/quote]

If he's playing guard, he's not touching the football, which could actually make him valuable...or less detrimental at least.

Re: Mega-Merge: 2010 Free Agency Rumors and Reports Thread
 

[quote=Lotus;670029]We could also sign both Rabach and Mawae for depth purposes at C, knowing that neither one is the long-term solution.[/quote]

Yeah perhaps but that's a lot of money to tie up at one spot. We could have just let Rabach go if he wasn't in our plans as a starter.

Re: Mega-Merge: 2010 Free Agency Rumors and Reports Thread
 

[quote]Pondering Clifton in Washington
March, 5, 2010
MAR 5
9:22
AM ET
Comment Email Print Share
By Kevin Seifert
Chad Clifton's scheduled visit to Washington promises an interesting dilemma for both the player and for Green Bay. I thought Andrew Brandt, the former Packers executive who now operates the National Football Post, put it well via Twitter:

[+] Enlarge
Jeff Hanisch/US Presswire
Don't expect the Packers to wage a bidding war over Chad Clifton.
"Chad Clifton to visit Redskins, whose LT just retired. Chad loves GB, but can't see GBP in bidding war with them."

Yes, it's hard to imagine general manager Ted Thompson bidding against Washington owner Daniel Snyder, if it comes to that. The Redskins have bid farewell to left tackle Chris Samuels, and new coach Mike Shanahan is going to get whatever he wants from Snyder. If it's a veteran left tackle with experience in a zone blocking scheme, then so be it. Snyder won't let money get in the way.

So then you wonder if Clifton, a quiet and introverted guy who has spent his entire career with the Packers, really wants to leave Green Bay and play in Washington's annual high-profile circus. We're not privy to his last-minute negotiations with the Packers, so I don't know how close or far the sides are from a numbers perspective. But if Clifton thinks he can shake more money loose by following through with a visit, he's probably misjudging Thompson's reputation for sticking to his core beliefs.

And in many cases over recent years, Thompson has insisted on replacing veterans with younger, recently drafted players. It has worked more often than it has failed, and I've felt for some time the Packers needed to initiate a succession plan at both tackle positions.

We've discussed this dynamic thoroughly in the past few weeks, and we can only assume the Packers would replace Clifton with second-year player T.J. Lang, a fourth-round pick in 2009. I'm on board with replacing Clifton sooner rather than later, given his recent health issues, but to me it would have to be accompanied by the return of right tackle Mark Tauscher. The Packers could minimize the pain of that succession plan by proceeding gradually.

It's possible the Packers could draft a starting-caliber left tackle next month, but that wouldn't change the worst-case dynamic: Having unproven players at both tackle positions is far from ideal for quarterback Aaron Rodgers and the rest of the offense.

We're not at that point yet, but I do think we should take Clifton's visit to Washington seriously and begin considering the repercussions of his possible departure.
[/quote]

[quote]RT @ProFootballTalk Chad Clifton to visit Redskins ... If he signs there, Redskins no longer have to draft an OT in round one.
about 10 hours ago via web[/quote]

Life is good.

Re: Mega-Merge: 2010 Free Agency Rumors and Reports Thread
 

[quote=Mattyk;670032]Yeah perhaps but that's a lot of money to tie up at one spot. We could have just let Rabach go if he wasn't in our plans as a starter.[/quote]

True about the money. But I was thinking that the situation might remain for just one, uncapped year, so as long as they don't sign for long-term guarantees, it is not that big of a deal. Put it this way: we could sign 3 or 4 Rabachs and Mawaes for the price of one Peppers. But you may be right because it still is a lot of money.

My hope is that we come home from the draft with Pouncey, anyway.

Re: Mega-Merge: 2010 Free Agency Rumors and Reports Thread
 

i dont think we're paying rabach 4.1MM a year to be a backup.

Re: Mega-Merge: 2010 Free Agency Rumors and Reports Thread
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;669972]Absolutely. However, with those two, they may not go after Okung in the first round and, instead go after Bradford while picking a couple of linemen they can develop behind the veterans for a year (maybe two). I think I would still like Okung and then a 2nd round QB.[/quote]

I'd like Okung, but I think if we're going to try to get our franchise QB in this draft, it's Bradford. I don't really see any of the other guys becoming successful QBs in the league, and I'm not entirely sure about Bradford.

Re: Mega-Merge: 2010 Free Agency Rumors and Reports Thread
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;670039]i dont think we're paying rabach 4.1MM a year to be a backup.[/quote]

Fine. Play him at guard. I'm not going to push the argument too far.