Josh Sitton Released - signs w/CHI 3yrs

Grave Digger 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. 

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.

Straw man much? 

IL_Pack_Fan posted:

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?

One that needs to fix a broken locker room.  Players shouldn't be confused.

ChilliJon posted:

SteveLuke posted:

Good to see TT was confident in Lane Taylor at his press conference today.

Both Taylor & Barclay were re-signed this last offseason, so they must have some level of confidence.

Of course, there is this: "I’m confident in those young men," Thompson said. "They played well last year." On M.D. Jennings and Jerron McMillian prior to '13 season."  https://twitter.com/PackersNotes

Same guy that drafted Datone, Lacy, Bakhtiari, Tretter, and Micah in 2013. 

Its hard to go to the playoffs 7 straight years. It's harder to win another SB. 

It is hard to go to the playoffs 7 straight years, though I think, as with Tom Brady and Peyton Manning, it is easier to do so with a top QB like Aaron Rodgers behind center each of those 7 years. And the 5 players you listed were also all decent to great value picks by TT in 2013.

Nonetheless, TT's expressed confidence in the abilities MD Jennings and Jerron McMillian after he cut Woodson and just before they went on to provide historically bad safety play in 2013 (well for part of 2013 in McMillian's case because he was so pathetic he got cut mid-season), seems a bit more topical given MM's assurance today that Lane Taylor is a worthy replacement for Josh Sitton (and that Don Barclay is waiting in the wings should Taylor falter). Going from Sitton to Taylor or Barclay in 2016 strikes me as being remarkably similar to going from Woodson to Jennings & McMillian in 2013.

Anyway, let's hope Lane Taylor plays more like Cory Linsley did when he was thrust into the starting job after Tretter went down in 2014. Linsley played remarkably well that (and he was a great TT 5th round pick that year by the way).

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.

Following up what others have said and throwing in what McCarthy was saying, I'm going with a simple numbers game. How many cigars fit in the box:  53 other guys they had to have first.  

Something had to give, and since they saw Sitton leaving next year anyway, they felt he was the one getting squeezed out now.  As people have said, Peppers seems like a better candidate on that score, but they must feel Lane is ready now and I do trust their decision-making  (if not their diplomacy).

Really, when McCarthy talked about the importance of the QB position in response to a question about Sitton, saying how some positions are more important than others, and how everyone would agree QB is more important, that sounded like the answer right there:  Hundley's injury forced them to have to keep Callahan, which in the # 53/54 positions, put Sitton at 54. 

I don't think Lane took Sitton's spot, I think Callahan did. And it didn't happen until the last minute.

I also still believe communication would do a lot of good, but maybe they don't want to put a locker-room bulls-eye on guys like Callahan either.  

So yeah, I'll try to STFU and move on my own self here.

Winning cures a lot.

Poor Sitton isn't getting cured, then.

Herschel posted:

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.

Looking at all the information, attitude most likely had a lot to do with it, if not it is just not a logical decision. TT covets comp picks, Sitton is better than anyone we can replace him with, when Sitton questioned play calling last year MM said that "Josh needs to worry about playing guard", Sitton was told this week that he was in line behind younger guys to discuss contracts, MM mentioned "locker room" & "program" when discussing the move, IMHO the timing, etc. points to Sitton openly questioning the organization & program, MM seeing him as an attitude problem that could expand to others since he is the player the o-lineman seem to look up to. 

Linsley played remarkably well that (and he was a great TT 5th round pick that year by the way).

But I thought Ted sucked.  

Really, when McCarthy talked about the importance of the QB position in response to a question about Sitton, saying how some positions are more important than others

 That entire sequence was to me the most revealing part of Mike's press conference. BAM!

I'd be willing to buy that this was a relatively normal football decision were it not for the fact that TT was willing to throw away a likely fourth round pick in the process. Hard for me to believe that attitude and a potential locker room problem didn't play a significant role in the decision.

Part of the timing had to be waiting to see how injuries affected the line through camp. In general, the team made it through camp with minimal injury impact and it gave them the freedom to do whatever they wanted.

cuqui posted:

Really, when McCarthy talked about the importance of the QB position in response to a question about Sitton, saying how some positions are more important than others

 That entire sequence was to me the most revealing part of Mike's press conference. BAM!

He went to it right away too.  He was being straight up.  He all but said it.

They weighed the lost pick in there too. That's how important QB is to them.

And it was injury-related and therefore unexpected is why it surprised everybody. They didn't plan on it either.

Out of everything I have read about this, I still see no sense in this move. As someone noted above about TT leaving the safety position weak with the Woodson cut a few years ago, it does appear that every year he leaves one area of the team weak for either money concerns or his stubbornness in keeping his young and unproven guys.

Obviously time will tell if this was the correct move but if AR spends this year running for his life due to inept play on the line or injuries (where having both Sitton and Taylor would have been nice) and Sitton is at least serviceable in Chicago, this is a fireable move.

Note I am more than happy to eat a big bowl of crow down the road and would enjoy it immensely.

One final note, TT needs to have the cajones and respect the fan base more and make a statement on why he cut him. Even if it is the usual canned cliche-ridden statement.

Clearly you don't need strong, pro bowl caliber interior line play to win a Super Bowl.

Locker room attitude.  This keeps coming up in discussion.  I don't think Josh Sitton was necessarily a locker room bad attitude.  In fact I believe he was a team leader and therefore must have been saying and doing most of the right things. Many circumstances  have a hand in this move.  Injury, balance of talent, and money all keep Ted's hair white.  But getting this team to the edge may be the most important.  Reggie White, Charles Woodson, and others have led championship teams to that edge.  I suspect Mike Daniels could be next.  By removing any complacency the door just opened for this team to become better.  We will see if someone can lead us through it.

Grave Digger posted:

As long as the team is winning the complainers will stfu.

Highly doubtful.

Ted is just making it easier for all of you to accept Lacy signing a free agent contract with MN next year

BrainDed posted:

Straw man much? 

Because your theory that Ted has given up on this season or any season looking toward the future makes a lot of sense. 

Ted signed Taylor  to a two year 4.5 million contract over the offseason. That should have given us an idea something was up. Much like his draft picks that take a roster spot over others that outperformed them, Taylor did not outperform Sitton but was given the job because of the lower contract. He has it until he proves he cant handle it. Ted gets the benefit of the doubt because he has been right more than he has been wrong but noboby can say Lane Taylor is even in the same universe as Sitton as a player. Except McCarthy. Apparently multiple pressures allowed and penalties ares not the standard by which offensive linemen are measured.

Taylor played well last season when he was called upon, but he hasn't exactly looked like a starting guard this preseason. 

Then again, Sitton at times last year didn't look like the All Pro version either.  

It's comfort vs age and upside I guess 

BrainDed posted:

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.  

Super easy, it's a roster move and we've seen it multiple times from multiple teams.  Even the really good ones.  And again you refuse to see the impact of Sitton playing out his contract.  If your aren't negotiating contracts before they're up your up against FA.   Dougherty's article states inside guys said Josh was "uncommunicative and haughty" in the locker room.  He's a leader and he's sending the wrong message, especially when the contracts being negotiated are for his replacement.  Lombardi must've given up on multiple seasons if this is your standard.  Belichek too.  

Seriously, you're reaching and reaching hard.  It's a ****ing football move.  And another thing, if we're asking TT to explain himself I suggest we ask the same of Sitton.  Both have the same canned answers because BOTH are practicing professional courtesy and protecting a) the organization b) Sitton's rep.  I don't know of many teams (besides the morons) that want a openly critical player especially when said player is in decline.  

So again, you want to ask how I can not question TT's commitment?  Easy, it's ****ing business and if Sitton chose to put the gun to the organization's head he needed to be jettisoned for the EXACT reason of cohesion.

NO ONE is bigger than the team.

Maybe the drop off to Taylor might not be as dramatic as some think? This is not like going from Wahle/Rivera to Klemm/O'Dwyer. My guess is that they see it probably more like going from Mike Flanagan to Scott Wells (Pro Bowl Center to unproven former practice squad player with high upside). Flanny wasn't as accomplished as Sitton, but the analogy is more about going from a really good proven starter to an unproven young player.

Music City posted:

Henry 

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.

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. 

It has plenty of plausible rationale, we just don't know the details.  Health, locker room, contract negotiation and if some articles are to be believed, sending a message.

After watching the historic collapses of this team over the past few years I sure the **** don't have a problem with sending a message.  

chickenboy posted:

Grave Digger posted:

Maybe the drop off to Taylor might not be as dramatic as some think? This is not like going from Wahle/Rivera to Klemm/O'Dwyer. My guess is that they see it probably more like going from Mike Flanagan to Scott Wells (Pro Bowl Center to unproven former practice squad player with high upside). Flanny wasn't as accomplished as Sitton, but the analogy is more about going from a really good proven starter to an unproven young player.

I'm not buying that after watching him fail all preseason.  I do think they'll be able to adjust until the Return of Big Ern is replaced by Tretter and Linsley.

When the bullets were flying in live game action last year the consistent opinion was that he didn't embarrass himself. I don't think anyone would mistake him for an All Pro, but he seemingly acquitted himself just fine when given the opportunity. Given time to build chemistry with the others over a multi-game stretch and with everyone healthy I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt before I say he's a good/poor replacement.  

I guarantee there will be more people watching oline play this year and likely miss what's actually happening on the field.

There might also be something to be said for a guy who knows he's a backup with an all-pro in front of him. Taylor knew he was never going to unseat Sitton. Taylor did okay when put in the game last year, and I would expect that MM and TT believe he will be a lot better as a consistent starter. Not Sitton quality, but he'll grow into it.

Grave Digger posted:

When the bullets were flying in live game action last year the consistent opinion was that he didn't embarrass himself. I don't think anyone would mistake him for an All Pro, but he seemingly acquitted himself just fine when given the opportunity. Given time to build chemistry with the others over a multi-game stretch and with everyone healthy I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt before I say he's a good/poor replacement.  

Actually, I think the consistent opinion was that Taylor was OK in the run game but a liability as a pass blocker. Sitton on the other hand was a pass blocking stalwart -- giving up just 2.5 sacks the past couple of years.

When your biggest asset is your QB, I think it is entirely appropriate to question the viability of moving from Josh Sitton to Lane Taylor -- when you did not have to make such a move.

Indeed, I think it is wishful thinking to view the situation otherwise.

I already guarantee more people will be watching Adams than Taylor.

Had been thinking about this over the past few days. It's not like it hasn't happened before. I believe Ringo wasn't in his prime still, but he still was an all pro after this and the trade at the time was somewhat surprising. I think GB did ok after it ok too, but I'm not a very big Packer history guy.

“When I called Ringo the next year, before the 1964 season, I had talked to Vince about it. And when I got a hold of Ringo he started to complain about this and complain about that and complain about his contract. I said, ‘Wait a minute, Jim. You wrote your own contract last year and the old man gave you $1,000 more than you asked for.’ Then he said, ‘Give me $25,000 or trade me.’ I went to Vince and told him. I said he wants $25,000 or he wants to be traded. I’m sure Vince had already been working on a trade, but he liked to make it seem like he did it snap. Anyway, he gets a hold of Philadelphia, makes the trade and, within an hour, called me back and said he was calling Ringo. No agent.”

Bad Bob's Report Card from January:

JOSH SITTON: One of the top five guards in the NFL. Not quite as dominant as in previous seasons due in part to chronic back pain. Missed just eight snaps in 18 games. Agreed to the coaches' misguided notion that he was the best option at LT against Minnesota's Everson Griffen in Game 16. His pressure total of 15, his highest since '10, was misleading because six came at the hands of Griffen. He also suffered two "bad" runs at Griffen's expense; his total of 15 1/2 was his highest since '11. Sitton also had more penalties (10, including seven in the last eight games) than ever before. Just wasn't as consistent getting his man blocked or as focused as he has been over the years. Grade: B.

LANE TAYLOR: Started at RG in Game 12 and at LG in Game 16. Those were the first two starts of Taylor's three-year career, and though he wasn't exceptional he certainly didn't look out of place. While not a great athlete, he has become much better protecting his edges in pass protection. What makes Taylor an interesting player is his willingness to get after people. His totals – 2 1/2 "bad" runs, 3 1/2 pressures – were acceptable. Grade: D-plus.

D+ isn't a great grade, but the fact that even Bad Bob says he doesn't look out of place tells me there's a foundation he can build on. He will never be Josh Sitton in his prime, but with him being flanked by two really good players I think he can be good enough. I threw in Bob's grade of Sitton from 2015, interesting to see that there was in fact some measurable drop off. 

Taylor isn't the future.  He's Big Ern backup material.  Get Linsley healthy.

This        

Those grades don't seem to match Bob's write-ups.  

Is McGinn Irish?   1 of 50

You're right, Lane isn't the future and I don't think the organization thinks that either. The point wasn't that he's the long term answer, the point was that letting go of Sitton wasn't about Sitton's personality, the lockerroom, or even necessarily the 7 mil cap number. I think it was about the organization thinking they were paying Sitton 5 mil more than Lane or any other player and the drop-off in talent wasn't enough to justify that salary difference. 

Now here's a future something to worry about.

In 5-billion yrs the Sun will expand & engulf our orbit as the charred ember that was once Earth vaporizes. Have a nice day.

— Neil deGrasse Tyson (@neiltyson) September 6, 2016

Thanks Neil, hey maybe lay off on the science for a month or two what do you think https://t.co/oYx1jjXLoD

— Proven Content Maker (@Bro_Pair) September 6, 2016

SteveLuke posted:

Nonetheless, TT's expressed confidence in the abilities MD Jennings and Jerron McMillian after he cut Woodson and just before they went on to provide historically bad safety play in 2013 (well for part of 2013 in McMillian's case because he was so pathetic he got cut mid-season), seems a bit more topical given MM's assurance today that Lane Taylor is a worthy replacement for Josh Sitton (and that Don Barclay is waiting in the wings should Taylor falter). Going from Sitton to Taylor or Barclay in 2016 strikes me as being remarkably similar to going from Woodson to Jennings & McMillian in 2013.

Historically bad safety play in 2013, the same year Rodgers was injured for 7 games.  The same year even with all of that we still won the division.

I'm not particularly worried about our chances of making the playoffs, given our history.

Fireable move. Yep, ****can the GM and Head Coach before the 1st game. That would certainly be a good move.

Grave Digger posted:

I threw in Bob's grade of Sitton from 2015, interesting to see that there was in fact some measurable drop off. 

So Bob told TT to cut Sitton?  That would explain a few things. 

Technically, because we peddle influence, we told Bob to tell TT to cut Sitton.   I would like an explanation from all of you.