No, you can't trade a player when other teams know he's damaged goods.
Pakrz posted:I mean ****... you can't even trade Sitton for a serviceable DL???
The fact that they couldn't may speak volumes.
TT couldn't trade gold bullion if the stock market crashed
Well this certainly added intrigue to this season beyond Janis the Dumb and Superstar Dirty Harry.
The overall decision makes sense. Just truly strange on the timing. Sitton must be beat to hell. Isn't comforting when you hear Linsley has a back injury too.
Pakrz posted:Like Hank said, the only thing makes even remote sense to me would be if Linsley is ready to go and joins Lang and Tretter inside. Still doesn't make sense in cutting a pro bowler though.
If the running game goes nowhere due to this move OR Rodgers gets so much as a hang nail because of a hemorrhaging Sitton-less interior line, the pitchforks will be out for TT and I can't say I'll blame them.
This is a WTF move and there is just no other way to spin it.
I'm going with gangrenous toe.
Linsley needs to quit playing worlds strongest man in the weight room.
Boris posted:TT couldn't trade gold bullion if the stock market crashed
TT knew to invest in Bitcoin.
I don't see a whole lot more depth than last year unless you're convinced the rooks can step in for multiple games without sweating. I'm not.
Henry posted:The overall decision makes sense. Just truly strange on the timing. Sitton must be beat to hell. Isn't comforting when you hear Linsley has a back injury too.
Wait what....Linsley has a back injury? Thought he was nursing a bad hamstring pull
TT makes the tough decisions. I'll never fault the guy for that.
CAPackfan posted:Henry posted:The overall decision makes sense. Just truly strange on the timing. Sitton must be beat to hell. Isn't comforting when you hear Linsley has a back injury too.
Wait what....Linsley has a back injury? Thought he was nursing a bad hamstring pull
I'm pretty sure they said he didn't make the flight to Oakland because of his back. I may be mixing up my players.
Hamstring with Linsley, Clark has the back injury
The word on Linsley is that he re-pulled the same hamstring just before TC began. And that was the issue keeping him on the PUP. I have heard nothing regarding any back problem.
FLPACKER posted:Hamstring with Linsley, Clark has the back injury
That's it. My bad.
CAPackfan posted:Henry posted:The overall decision makes sense. Just truly strange on the timing. Sitton must be beat to hell. Isn't comforting when you hear Linsley has a back injury too.
Wait what....Linsley has a back injury? Thought he was nursing a bad hamstring pull
Corey Linsley to PUP, according to a source #Packers
Henry posted:The overall decision makes sense. Just truly strange on the timing. Sitton must be beat to hell. Isn't comforting when you hear Linsley has a back injury too.
It's smarter to dump a player when you have seen his replacement rather than gamble you have a replacement. They obviously liked what they saw from someone.
This was a surprise. Good luck to him.
Per Rotoworld:
Corey Linsley - C - Packers
Packers placed C Corey Linsley (hamstring) on the reserve/PUP.
Linsley has reportedly torn his hamstring twice this year. The PUP will cost him at least six games, but he is likely out for the season.
Strange that not one beat writer picked up anything on this until today.
Linsley to PUP... Jesus ****.
Grave Digger posted:Henry posted:The overall decision makes sense. Just truly strange on the timing. Sitton must be beat to hell. Isn't comforting when you hear Linsley has a back injury too.
It's smarter to dump a player when you have seen his replacement rather than gamble you have a replacement. They obviously liked what they saw from someone.
I sure the hell hope so. Has anyone besides the scrubs been rotating positions this TC?
Grave Digger posted:Henry posted:The overall decision makes sense. Just truly strange on the timing. Sitton must be beat to hell. Isn't comforting when you hear Linsley has a back injury too.
It's smarter to dump a player when you have seen his replacement rather than gamble you have a replacement. They obviously liked what they saw from someone.
That someone is either Don Barclay or Lane Taylor, to which I say, I completely disagree with whatever the team sees in them
wow, the Oline depth is all but gone now. Not liking this at all.
mr21mr21 posted:Per Rotoworld:
Corey Linsley - C - PackersPackers placed C Corey Linsley (hamstring) on the reserve/PUP.
Linsley has reportedly torn his hamstring twice this year. The PUP will cost him at least six games, but he is likely out for the season.
Wtf
pkr_north posted:stupid move, don't care how they want to spin it. very bear/viking like on TT's part. at least you keep the guy for the year, wtf are you going to do with cap $ week 1...stupid move really stupid.
Bear and Viking like??? Where has that gotten them. Everyone needs to keep their panties out of a bunch. If TT thought he was part of the plan for this year and the future he would've kept him. A bit shocking, but everyone needs to calm down, the sky is still yellow.
LMAO. Linsley to PUP. Not like TT didn't know this. Perhaps dementia is truly setting in.
Just watch his new punter blow up in his face next. And Masthay makes the Pro Bowl on his new team..
Ok. Hold on just a great big mother ****ing second.....
Linsley is going to the PUP list and they cut Sitton?!?!?!?!
This is after the guy they brought in recently, Steuck went on season IR.
So they are perfectly fine with Barclay at G??? Seriously, WTF is going on here?
This is a stupid move to do now. You go through the whole off season and then do this? This doesn't just take a pro bowler off the line, it also creates that sliver of doubt that can derail a unified championship mentality. Now it's a distraction.
Just stupid...
I see the move as "Patriot-like", rather than Bear or Viking-like.
Likely Barclay at LG. He was terrible last year at Tackle, but he was coming off his ACL injury and just shouldn't be at Tackle. Might be a different story at Guard, he's a smart player and a grinder, so he may end up being good enough.
If losing a Guard derails a championship mentality then they likely didn't have that mentality to begin with. If you can win a Super Bowl with Marshall Newhouse at Tackle, you can win with Barclay or Lane Taylor at Guard.
Sorry if this has been posted, but anyone know what we save in cap this season with this move?
Maybe... but it still doesn't make sense to do it now. Before preseason? Sure.
But the Patriots dumped Mankins like this if memory serves. I guess there's somewhat of a precedent.
PackerRuss posted:pkr_north posted:stupid move, don't care how they want to spin it. very bear/viking like on TT's part. at least you keep the guy for the year, wtf are you going to do with cap $ week 1...stupid move really stupid.
Bear and Viking like??? Where has that gotten them. Everyone needs to keep their panties out of a bunch. If TT thought he was part of the plan for this year and the future he would've kept him. A bit shocking, but everyone needs to calm down, the sky is still yellow.
you don't let a pro-bowler go while hes still got a year left, we are not in cap hell by any stretch, its stupid, there is no spin you can put on it...stupid. the only way its not is if GB announces he has resigned to a cap friendly contract, but cutting him when you are pushing for a sb is stupid, no other way to say it...
Grave Digger posted:If losing a Guard derails a championship mentality then they likely didn't have that mentality to begin with. If you can win a Super Bowl with Marshall Newhouse at Tackle, you can win with Barclay or Lane Taylor at Guard.
You certainly can but you are still downgrading at a position for no real good reason. Makes sense for a team that's not really going anywhere, not so much for a team looking to win it all this season
Gotta find out what you have as replacements. It's dumber to cut a starter if you don't know there's a viable replacement.
I don't like Barclay at LG. At all.
I like the depth of the OL far less. This OL is seriously thin.
This isn't going to derail a championship, just because we are contenders doesn't mean we ignore the future. If this puts our OLine in a better position over the long haul then it's a positive move. Sucks to see a player like Sitton go, but it doesn't mean a SB is off the table.