Just watched Lang's interview on Packers.com. Doesn't sound like a guy who is happy with the organization at all. He's obviously sad right now about losing his BFF, but I won't be surprised if he decides to move on after the season. It's not critical to keep one guy happy, but it seems like Sitton was pretty well liked so this move may have far reaching consequences in the lockerroom. Hopefully guys are professional enough that they can deal with the fact that it's just business, but it seems right now that we have at least 2 guys (Lang and Bulaga, who was also interviewed) whose heads aren't in it right now.
CAPackFan95 posted:MichiganPacker2 posted:Wonder if the Bears made him pass a physical?
You wonder if the Bears, before handing out $10M in guaranteed money and a 3 year $21M contract, made him pass a physical?
For reals?
I guess I should have put the sarcasm emoji on that - I thought the sarcasm was fairly self-evident.
Grave Digger posted:Just watched Lang's interview on Packers.com. Doesn't sound like a guy who is happy with the organization at all. He's obviously sad right now about losing his BFF, but I won't be surprised if he decides to move on after the season. It's not critical to keep one guy happy, but it seems like Sitton was pretty well liked so this move may have far reaching consequences in the lockerroom. Hopefully guys are professional enough that they can deal with the fact that it's just business, but it seems right now that we have at least 2 guys (Lang and Bulaga, who was also interviewed) whose heads aren't in it right now.
I think that the negative effect is short term, whereas the reason they cut him was that his negative effect in the lockerroom would have lasted the entire season, effecting the young offensive lineman. IMHO, Sitton must have given some very strong signals that he was not "all-in" for the season, which being the most dominant personality of the o-line, the Packer's felt could result in other's attitude's eroding. Saw some fan comments regarding how could we keep guys with poor character, but cut a guy like Sitton. Coaches care most about how much the player's believe and are "all-in" to their program. I think this is why Sitton is gone.
Sitton speaks.
Josh Sitton not seeking revenge with Bears
By Tom Silverstein
GREEN BAY - Guard Josh Sitton said his primary motivation in signing with the Chicago Bears wasn't a chance to play the Green Bay Packers twice a year.
Speaking to reporters inside the Bears locker room, Sitton said, things like familiarity with the division, proximity to his home and the job head coach John Fox has done were all factors in picking the Bears.
"I like the weather up here," Sitton deadpanned. "It's too damn hot in the South."
Sitton said that guard Kyle Long texted him soon after the Packers released him Saturday to encourage him to join the Bears. Numerous teams contacted his agent, Sitton said, and he let him handle all the financial details.
Sitton signed a three-year, $21.5 million deal that included $10 million guaranteed.
"I wanted to get the decision made yesterday or today, as quickly as I can," Sitton said. "I wanted to get to where I was going and be able to learn the offense and be able to jump in right this week. The longer it took, the harder it would have been to learn the offense. Chicago, they had me in first, and they got it done first."
When asked if part of the motivation in signing with the Bears was a chance to exact revenge on his old team, Sitton said no.
"Honestly, it didnāt have anything to do with sticking it to the Packers," he said. "More familiar with the division, close to where I was."
Sitton has a home in Green Bay and said the convenience of playing close to home was a factor. He said he didn't feel he needed to go on a nationwide tour to find a new home.
As a vested veteran, Sitton wasn't subject to waivers, so he could have signed with anybody he wanted.
"It was the closest place for me so I guess it was pretty easy," Sitton said. "You know, itās only 2Ā½ hours from home or from Green Bay. So, that was actually kind of a factor. It was quick and it made more sense to get to do this one first."
Sitton said he is a fan of what Fox has done with the Bears defense and believes the team is headed in the right direction.
"The business side is always the first determining factor," Sitton said. "But I think Coach Fox is building a team that can win here. I like staying in the same climate. I like playing on grass; obviously, I've been doing that my whole career. I like that aspect, and I'm familiar with the division."
Sitton said he expects to continue playing guard for the Bears.
Sitton speaks....and says nothing
Not a word about playing for a contender. Got his last big deal, so he's happy.
Why should he want revenge? It's not like GB wronged him. He wasn't shipped off to Cleveland, he got the chance to pick his new team and negotiate a multi-year deal. He now has more money and more security than he had early last week. He was also cut and signed early enough that his salary will be guaranteed. Obviously he'd rather stay, but of ways he could have been forced out of GB I think he got off pretty good. Sounds like he recognizes that, it's likely his first experience with the harsh reality of NFL business.
I am going to be sure and DVR the game this Sunday so that if Taylor gets blown up and Aaron takes couple of sacks, I can check the tape and see that Taylor really did do a good job.
I'm surprised Sitton didn't tell us whether he was or wasn't a locker room cancer. He owes it to us to tell us the truth.
Winning cures a lot. If Lang or anyone else has butthurt, they need to get over it, like now. I'm disappointed Sitton isn't playing this season with GB but it what it is and we are talking about a guard here.
When I think about what this team needs to make a SB run, it's players like Rodgers, Jordy, Jared Cook, the running game, a very talented secondary, and an admittingly favorable schedule.
Sitton said he expects to continue playing guard for the Bears.
That would be perfect if the Bears to moved him to T, where he struggled significantly last year in week 17.
Grave Digger posted:Why should he want revenge? It's not like GB wronged him. He wasn't shipped off to Cleveland, he got the chance to pick his new team and negotiate a multi-year deal. He now has more money and more security than he had early last week. He was also cut and signed early enough that his salary will be guaranteed. Obviously he'd rather stay, but of ways he could have been forced out of GB I think he got off pretty good. Sounds like he recognizes that, it's likely his first experience with the harsh reality of NFL business.
Didn't you know that's the reoccurring trope? Ever since Bert butthurted his way out of Green Bay now every player that leaves wants to stick it to TT.
Just ask Vajeen fans, their more upset about how TT mistreated Sitton so badly than any Packers fan.
Dr._Bob posted:I'm surprised Sitton didn't tell us whether he was or wasn't a locker room cancer. He owes it to us to tell us the truth.
I think you need to be a man and tell us why you still wear superhero undies.
Grave Digger posted:Just watched Lang's interview on Packers.com. Doesn't sound like a guy who is happy with the organization at all. He's obviously sad right now about losing his BFF, but I won't be surprised if he decides to move on after the season. It's not critical to keep one guy happy, but it seems like Sitton was pretty well liked so this move may have far reaching consequences in the lockerroom. Hopefully guys are professional enough that they can deal with the fact that it's just business, but it seems right now that we have at least 2 guys (Lang and Bulaga, who was also interviewed) whose heads aren't in it right now.
But I was told they would be happy because it means more money for them?!?!
Thats nonsense. The message this sends is that this year isn't that important. We're not 100% committed to winning this year. It's only natural that the players will take that to heart and be more about themselves than the team.
The message is that if you are not 100% in, you are out, and that comes more from MM than from TT.
BrainDed posted:But I was told they would be happy because it means more money for them?!?!
Thats nonsense. The message this sends is that this year isn't that important. We're not 100% committed to winning this year. It's only natural that the players will take that to heart and be more about themselves than the team.
Link on your first statement. A player isn't going to get more than he's worth regardless if the Packers have $1 or 1 billion under the cap.
And what's nonsense is thinking an organization in the NFL, especially a top tier franchise, would say they "aren't committed" to winning because they made a roster move.
Seriously, your chap ass is showing.
packerboi posted:Winning cures a lot. If Lang or anyone else has butthurt, they need to get over it, like now. I'm disappointed Sitton isn't playing this season with GB but it what it is and we are talking about a guard here.
When I think about what this team needs to make a SB run, it's players like Rodgers, Jordy, Jared Cook, the running game, a very talented secondary, and an admittingly favorable schedule.
First and foremost, I think they need to keep Rodgers upright to win.
Sitton gave 2.5 sacks in the past 3 years and has only missed 2 games since 09.
True friends would be happy for Sitton. He has $4 million more today than he had 48 hours ago.
Henry posted:BrainDed posted:But I was told they would be happy because it means more money for them?!?!
Thats nonsense. The message this sends is that this year isn't that important. We're not 100% committed to winning this year. It's only natural that the players will take that to heart and be more about themselves than the team.
Link on your first statement. A player isn't going to get more than he's worth regardless if the Packers have $1 or 1 billion under the cap.
And what's nonsense is thinking an organization in the NFL, especially a top tier franchise, would say they "aren't committed" to winning.
Seriously, your chap ass is showing.
It's been stated in this thread several times.
How can you not question TT's commitment to this year? Well, unless your analysis is this is all about locker room chemistry. I'm having a hard time with that one. He's been around long enough to know that sometimes players need to play out a contract year with no hope of resigning with current team.
Henry posted:Dr._Bob posted:I'm surprised Sitton didn't tell us whether he was or wasn't a locker room cancer. He owes it to us to tell us the truth.
I think you need to be a man and tell us why you still wear superhero undies.
Because my wife likes to call me "The Flash" although I'm still not sure why she chose that one.
ammo posted:True friends would be happy for Sitton. He has $4 million more today than he had 48 hours ago.
I'm sure they are happy for Sitton and pissed at the brass.
Grave Digger posted:Just watched Lang's interview on Packers.com. Doesn't sound like a guy who is happy with the organization at all. He's obviously sad right now about losing his BFF, but I won't be surprised if he decides to move on after the season. It's not critical to keep one guy happy, but it seems like Sitton was pretty well liked so this move may have far reaching consequences in the lockerroom. Hopefully guys are professional enough that they can deal with the fact that it's just business, but it seems right now that we have at least 2 guys (Lang and Bulaga, who was also interviewed) whose heads aren't in it right now.
Quotes:
"Devastated, confused, shocked."
"We know as much as you guys do."
(Message?) "Nobody is safe."
Yay, no secrets here. Best to keep everyone guessing.
16 pages and two days worth of conjecture here, yet nobody here can possibly see personnel through the eyes of Ted Thompson---I'm just going to go ahead and trust him. Anybody here who is smarter than Ted want to step forward and tell me why you're smarter? And then tell me what you do for a living.
How can you be pissed at the people who gave him that opportunity? If anything they are pissed it didn't happen to them.
HenryAnd what's nonsense is thinking an organization in the NFL, especially a top tier franchise, would say they "aren't committed" to winning because they made a roster move.
Seriously, your chap ass is showing.
That's a leap. But this move doesn't have a plausible rationale except "We don't think his back will hold up." Beyond that, he should have played out 2016. This was an unnecessary preemptive move that seems more likely to backfire than succeed.
Blair Kiel posted:And then tell me what you do for a living.
Not this again!! 
Blair Kiel posted:16 pages and two days worth of conjecture here, yet nobody here can possibly see personnel through the eyes of Ted Thompson---I'm just going to go ahead and trust him. Anybody here who is smarter than Ted want to step forward and tell me why you're smarter? And then tell me what you do for a living.
I'm smarter because I married Jenny and he didn't. I own a shrimp company and am an early investor in Apple Computers.
- Forrest Gump
Jenny was a tramp.
Blair Kiel posted:16 pages and two days worth of conjecture here, yet nobody here can possibly see personnel through the eyes of Ted Thompson---I'm just going to go ahead and trust him. Anybody here who is smarter than Ted want to step forward and tell me why you're smarter? And then tell me what you do for a living.
I for one am not saying that. I'm just saying some communication would do some good right now. Did you see the interviews? That locker room is a funeral.
Somebody somewhere simply stated that maybe they think Lane will be better than Sitton this year all things considered.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
Blair Kiel posted:Somebody somewhere simply stated that maybe they think Lane will be better than Sitton this year all things considered.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
I guess all we can do is hope... And bitch and moan in my case. Henry was right, my ass is seriously chapped.
Taylor took a lot of camp reps with the 1's.
I wish we knew the real reason why Sitton was sent packing. But one thing I think most of us have learned watching this team under TT, transparency is not really in his vocabulary much less with his philosophy in how he runs the Packers.
It's this way with injuries (e.g. "has a knee"). It's this way with Free Agency. It's this way with player transactions. And Green Bay is incredibly unique in that there is no owner pushing TT to sit in front of cameras and explain himself. No better example then right after the divisional playoff loss in Arizona last season where Ted hopped a plane and headed to Florida to scout. He had no owner ordering him to sit in a press conference and explain away why they just lost.
No one has to like it, but it's the simple reality of how he runs things and MM follows suit to a tee.
TT's philosophy is to keep his team young, keep them mostly on the cheap, and virtually no position ever "ages out". It also appears to be an organization where openly questioning the coach, how things are run, free agency activity, etc is highly discouraged. And if you do, you will likely be shown the door (see Jennings. Sitton).
In terms of smarts, I personally think I could whip TT's butt if we played eachother in Trivial Pursuit 80's Edition.
In terms of building an NFL football team, no argument from me, TT is smarter. That said, he's not perfect, let's just hope what he's done here is the right move. It sure doesn't feel like it right now, but if the Pack starts the season solidly and Taylor isn't a turnstile out there, the Sitton loss will eventually be forgotten.
Grave Digger posted:Just watched Lang's interview on Packers.com. Doesn't sound like a guy who is happy with the organization at all. He's obviously sad right now about losing his BFF, but I won't be surprised if he decides to move on after the season. It's not critical to keep one guy happy, but it seems like Sitton was pretty well liked so this move may have far reaching consequences in the lockerroom. Hopefully guys are professional enough that they can deal with the fact that it's just business, but it seems right now that we have at least 2 guys (Lang and Bulaga, who was also interviewed) whose heads aren't in it right now.
I said the same thing 3 pages ago but no one said a peep. I guess everyone has me on ignore.
The wallflower.
This was either an issue of his contract, level of play, health, clubhouse chemistry or some combination. What GM in the league would openly address any of those?
BrainDed posted:But I was told they would be happy because it means more money for them?!?!
Thats nonsense. The message this sends is that this year isn't that important. We're not 100% committed to winning this year. It's only natural that the players will take that to heart and be more about themselves than the team.
This is the kind of realistic thinking I miss by being a TT guy. I would never have thought outside the box enough to realize he's already given up on this year. Rodgers will be probably be traded for a 4th rounder at the trade deadline.
FLPACKER posted:The message is that if you are not 100% in, you are out, and that comes more from MM than from TT.
What makes you think he wasn't in it to win it?
If this is strictly a business move, it has nothing to do with Sitton's attitude.
Honestly I don't think it had anything to with Sitton's personality or even his contract status. I think they felt the drop-off from Sitton to Taylor wasn't enough to justify the salary gap. If Taylor had been terrible or injured, I doubt this move is made.
Taylor will be scrutinized by fans this whole season, probably unfairly so, because Sitton was a fan favorite. Ripkowski will be dealing with the same thing as will whoever succeeds Jordy Nelson some day. Taylor will have some off days, like all players do, but, as Packerboi said, winning will cure everything. As long as the team is winning the complainers will stfu.