I don't think Albert is in Clady's league right now, but I'd rather keep him.


Of course I don't have a problem drafting a RT at 1.1 either.

Clady has had the luxury of playing on a good team his entire career. If you switched the two around, there would be little to no difference between them.

I agree but that's hard to use in a deal making situation
Posted via Mobile Device

I would offer Albert a 5 year deal worth 43 million with 21 million guaranteed.

Staley will be a LT and you don't pay a RT that kind of money when you arent a contender

I think RT is becoming just as important as LT.

I can't believe some of you are fine letting a good player of ours walk over an insignificant amount just because we drafted an offensive tackle first overall.

If the market value for a quality left tackle is Cladys deal, sign Albert and focus on areas of need instead of creating more needs.

Good franchises let players walk all the time and find cheaper alternatives.

Albert definently deserves a long term deal but not like Cladys. Clady has never missed a game. Albert has only had 1 full season.

Not at cornerstone positions.

Fisher isn't going to be a career right tackle unless he sucks. It would be absurd to pay Albert like Clady if you think Fisher is a franchise LT.

If they did infact draft Fisher to be the LT, then yeah, I'd probably move Albert. But if they're ok keeping him at RT, sign Albert.

Teams are starting to view the RT spot more and more important than just a run blocker.

Been that way for a while now.
Do you want to only be able to rush the passer from one side?
Do you want to only to protect One side?
The premium on pass rushers has elevated the positional value of the RT to barely below LTs.....and pass rushers.

Welcome to 5 years ago.