You are currently viewing the old forums. We have upgraded to a new NFL Forum.
This old forum is being left as a read-only archive.
Please update your bookmarks to our new forum at forums.footballsfuture.com.


 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Packers Release Josh Sitton
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 65, 66, 67
 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
AlexGreen#20


Joined: 13 Jun 2012
Posts: 13518
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 7:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

skibrett15 wrote:
Ted is good at drafting, finding, training and retaining staff and scouts.

Beyond that, he's a bit of a stagnant NFL fart. He believes religion has a place in the workplace, and together with McCarthy has done very little to help a generational talent like Rodgers evolve his game.

2010 Rodgers is very much the same as 2016 Rodgers, and when the wheels start to go we'll see if he can adapt

The single most frustrating thing about Rodgers/McCarthy is that they have never seen eye to eye. Pure speculation on my perceived divide: McCarthy is a dumber human being than Rodgers, and I think that really bothers Rodgers.


I disagree with pretty much every point here.
_________________
BroncoinGermany wrote:
From the day he was born and subsequently starting to grow into his short neck, round face, scruffy beard and pale face, Bulaga was destined to be a Packers O-Linemen for life.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jsitton71#


Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Posts: 1742
Location: kenosha
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 7:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

GoPackGo wrote:
What if Sitton loved GB so much that he went to Chicago after being cut to sabotage them from within?

TT and Sitton playing 4D CHESS
That's all good but Sitton needs to not let Cutler get killed, Cutler will be the first non Packer to make the Packer hall of fame, he's got a better passer rating than Rodgers throwing INT's to Packer players. God forbid he gets hurt and they find a Tom Brady.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gizmo2012


Joined: 11 Mar 2007
Posts: 3163
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 8:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

AlexGreen#20 wrote:
skibrett15 wrote:
Ted is good at drafting, finding, training and retaining staff and scouts.

Beyond that, he's a bit of a stagnant NFL fart. He believes religion has a place in the workplace, and together with McCarthy has done very little to help a generational talent like Rodgers evolve his game.

2010 Rodgers is very much the same as 2016 Rodgers, and when the wheels start to go we'll see if he can adapt

The single most frustrating thing about Rodgers/McCarthy is that they have never seen eye to eye. Pure speculation on my perceived divide: McCarthy is a dumber human being than Rodgers, and I think that really bothers Rodgers.


I disagree with pretty much every point here.


I have the same opinion. I feel like I'm on some kind of magical mystery tour where Aaron Rodgers was expected to transcend NFL reality. Take the game yesterday, Rodgers escapability was as good as I've ever seen it. that play to Adams was incredible.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fightin Burrito


Joined: 04 Jan 2015
Posts: 46
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 9:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

As much fun Sitton always was, it seems he also was sometimes a bit problamatic.

http://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/dougherty/2016/09/11/dougherty-packers-persevere-wthout-sitton/90187692/

Quote:
The source said Sitton at times was a fun and engaging presence, but he also was brash and highly opinionated. He openly disparaged personnel moves, coaching decisions and his teammatesí abilities in any and every setting at the Packersí facilities, regardless of who was in earshot. He also could be argumentative in meetings and refused to do some blocking techniques and drills on the practice field.

The source said that while Sitton was at the top of his game, the Packers acquiesced. But as the 30-year-oldís play began to slip in the last year or so, in part because of his chronic back condition, the team felt less compelled to accommodate him. And when the coaching staff saw some of that behavior filtering to the younger linemen, the team parted ways.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
{Family Ghost}


Joined: 08 Jun 2010
Posts: 2866
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 10:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

AlexGreen#20 wrote:
By cutting Sitton we picked up 6ish million in cap space next year. We also get the chance to see which of our young lineman are worth keeping around.

By letting Sitton play out the season, we get a year of Sitton and (we probably pick up a 4th/5th round comp pick for the 2018 draft. Trying to find more info on this. His age/accrued seasons brings things into question.) We also are stuck approximating the production for the younger lineman.

+++++++++++

I would've kept him.


It would be easier to stomach if we would have been able to get a 4th or 5th round draft pick for his services .. this year preferably, or at worst after the 16' season. Thompson is all about value and in this case he kind of blew it and will get no compensation. I don't know when they started shopping Sitton, but I would have thought they would have gotten something if they would have done it several months back.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SE500


Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 931
Location: WISCONSIN
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 10:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Again, it is very telling that we could not make a trade involving Sitton. Like the mighty McGinn said, it might have been easier in April but VERY telling no team would step up now. Film doesn't lie, he can still play but at what level and what are his medicals? Only one team could sign him if he was cut, and apparently teams were willing to chance the fact that they would be that team. If not, no big deal. I think the Bears gave him foolish money with 10 million guaranteed.

Nobody here can know, and neither does the mighty McGinn. It looks like to me he was a miscontent, his play was regressing, his back was a concern, he was not going to be signed to an extension, and for now we wanted to carry the number of O-linemen that we are. The team sees future in the guys we have kept, no future in Sitton on top of the other issues.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gizmo2012


Joined: 11 Mar 2007
Posts: 3163
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 11:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

{Family Ghost} wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
By cutting Sitton we picked up 6ish million in cap space next year. We also get the chance to see which of our young lineman are worth keeping around.

By letting Sitton play out the season, we get a year of Sitton and (we probably pick up a 4th/5th round comp pick for the 2018 draft. Trying to find more info on this. His age/accrued seasons brings things into question.) We also are stuck approximating the production for the younger lineman.

+++++++++++

I would've kept him.


It would be easier to stomach if we would have been able to get a 4th or 5th round draft pick for his services .. this year preferably, or at worst after the 16' season. Thompson is all about value and in this case he kind of blew it and will get no compensation. I don't know when they started shopping Sitton, but I would have thought they would have gotten something if they would have done it several months back.


Obviously Sitton crossed a line that 'compensation be dammed' according to TT. If it keeps the family more together in the long run then so be it. I, for one, will not criticize TT for what had to be an extremely difficult decision.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PossibleCabbage


Joined: 25 Apr 2011
Posts: 4800
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 11:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fightin Burrito wrote:
As much fun Sitton always was, it seems he also was sometimes a bit problamatic.

http://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/dougherty/2016/09/11/dougherty-packers-persevere-wthout-sitton/90187692/

Quote:
The source said Sitton at times was a fun and engaging presence, but he also was brash and highly opinionated. He openly disparaged personnel moves, coaching decisions and his teammatesí abilities in any and every setting at the Packersí facilities, regardless of who was in earshot. He also could be argumentative in meetings and refused to do some blocking techniques and drills on the practice field.

The source said that while Sitton was at the top of his game, the Packers acquiesced. But as the 30-year-oldís play began to slip in the last year or so, in part because of his chronic back condition, the team felt less compelled to accommodate him. And when the coaching staff saw some of that behavior filtering to the younger linemen, the team parted ways.


This rings true for me. The thing about "jerks who are good at something" is that as soon as their ability to perform whatever task dips below a certain threshold, they become somewhat intolerable to keep around.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheOnlyThing


Joined: 01 Sep 2015
Posts: 842
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 12:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Packers D got embarrassed in the 2013 playoff when Colin Kaepernick ran wild against them. As pathetic as that defensive performance looked at the time, given Kap's career trajectory, it looks even worse today.

After that game, Charles Woodson made pointed remarks about the efficacy of Dom Capers' defensive game plan:

Kaepernick threw for 263 yards, and his 181 rushing yards were the most ever by a quarterback in any NFL game -- regular season or playoffs. He finished with a combined four touchdowns.

"It was just about trying to execute the defense we were in," Woodson said. "That's what it really boils down to. We didn't execute it. If it works, then it works. If it doesn't, then hopefully, or maybe, you make a change.


Woodson's remarks leads us to a question many asked: What was Packers defensive coordinator Dom Capers' plan? The Packers just didn't seem prepared for the 49ers' version of the read-option or Kaepernick's ability to run. No one seemed responsible for the quarterback in man-to-man, and Kaepernick simply took off.

"We didn't anticipate the quarterback running the way he did," Woodson said. "I guess that was the X-factor."

Why wasn't that anticipated?


That's why Kaepernick is the 49ers' starter -- his running ability makes him more dangerous than Alex Smith. And even if Kaepernick's speed caught the Packers off guard, there was no second-half adjustment. Or fourth-quarter adjustment, for that matter.

Capers deserves criticism, but he shouldn't lose his job, as some fans have suggested. The Packers have won a Super Bowl, gone 15-1 (2011) and won the NFC North twice in the past three seasons.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000125633/article/charles-woodson-pack-couldnt-stop-colin-kaepernick

Just a few weeks later, the Packers informed Charles that while the organization appreciated all his good work his services at safety would no longer be needed in GB. Instead, the Pack rolled into 2013 with younger players, Jerron McMillian & MD Jennings, manning one of the Safety positions. As Woodson has repeatedly made clear, TT never offered him an opportunity to return even on a reduced contract.

Perhaps the Pack truly believed Jerron & MD were the future at S despite their horrific play in 2013. Perhaps also, Woodson's outspokenness (on the 2013 SF playoff loss and other issues) expedited his departure.

Sitton is one of the very few players I can recall questioning the coaching (play calling actually) besides Woodson in the past 5 years and now he has been let go under even more curious circumstances.

It is also true that GB is usually one of the youngest teams in the NFL and inexperienced employees tend to be more compliant than salty veterans in every business. GB always leads the league in homegrown players -- that is players who only know the "Packer way" of operating as it has been done under TT/MM's leadership.

I know he is not popular to quote around here, but one of the things i found noteworthy after Greg Jennings left was when he said ""It's like everything that you know in Green Bay is like the best, the best, the best, the best, the best, ... And it's like total brainwashing. And I think you don't open your eyes to see what other teams have to offer unless you are in that position, and I was afforded this position." http://www.espn.com/nfl/trainingcamp13/story/_/id/9547994/greg-jennings-minnesota-vikings-was-brainwashed-green-bay-packers

I think that TT/MM are really serious about projecting GB as a different kind of organization and about preventing/stamping out what they consider to be "dissension" among the ranks. The cutting of Sitton certainly fits that narrative.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fightin Burrito


Joined: 04 Jan 2015
Posts: 46
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 12:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TheOnlyThing wrote:
The Packers D got embarrassed in the 2013 playoff when Colin Kaepernick ran wild against them. As pathetic as that defensive performance looked at the time, given Kap's career trajectory, it looks even worse today.

After that game, Charles Woodson made pointed remarks about the efficacy of Dom Capers' defensive game plan:

Kaepernick threw for 263 yards, and his 181 rushing yards were the most ever by a quarterback in any NFL game -- regular season or playoffs. He finished with a combined four touchdowns.

"It was just about trying to execute the defense we were in," Woodson said. "That's what it really boils down to. We didn't execute it. If it works, then it works. If it doesn't, then hopefully, or maybe, you make a change.


Woodson's remarks leads us to a question many asked: What was Packers defensive coordinator Dom Capers' plan? The Packers just didn't seem prepared for the 49ers' version of the read-option or Kaepernick's ability to run. No one seemed responsible for the quarterback in man-to-man, and Kaepernick simply took off.

"We didn't anticipate the quarterback running the way he did," Woodson said. "I guess that was the X-factor."

Why wasn't that anticipated?


That's why Kaepernick is the 49ers' starter -- his running ability makes him more dangerous than Alex Smith. And even if Kaepernick's speed caught the Packers off guard, there was no second-half adjustment. Or fourth-quarter adjustment, for that matter.

Capers deserves criticism, but he shouldn't lose his job, as some fans have suggested. The Packers have won a Super Bowl, gone 15-1 (2011) and won the NFC North twice in the past three seasons.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000125633/article/charles-woodson-pack-couldnt-stop-colin-kaepernick

Just a few weeks later, the Packers informed Charles that while the organization appreciated all his good work his services at safety would no longer be needed in GB. Instead, the Pack rolled into 2013 with younger players, Jerron McMillian & MD Jennings, manning one of the Safety positions. As Woodson has repeatedly made clear, TT never offered him an opportunity to return even on a reduced contract.

Perhaps the Pack truly believed Jerron & MD were the future at S despite their horrific play in 2013. Perhaps also, Woodson's outspokenness (on the 2013 SF playoff loss and other issues) expedited his departure.

Sitton is one of the very few players I can recall questioning the coaching (play calling actually) besides Woodson in the past 5 years and now he has been let go under even more curious circumstances.

It is also true that GB is usually one of the youngest teams in the NFL and inexperienced employees tend to be more compliant than salty veterans in every business. GB always leads the league in homegrown players -- that is players who only know the "Packer way" of operating as it has been done under TT/MM's leadership.

I know he is not popular to quote around here, but one of the things i found noteworthy after Greg Jennings left was when he said ""It's like everything that you know in Green Bay is like the best, the best, the best, the best, the best, ... And it's like total brainwashing. And I think you don't open your eyes to see what other teams have to offer unless you are in that position, and I was afforded this position." http://www.espn.com/nfl/trainingcamp13/story/_/id/9547994/greg-jennings-minnesota-vikings-was-brainwashed-green-bay-packers

I think that TT/MM are really serious about projecting GB as a different kind of organization and about preventing/stamping out what they consider to be "dissension" among the ranks. The cutting of Sitton certainly fits that narrative.


If you look at the article that I linked, it doesn't seem that they always try to silence the dissenter. They put up with Sitton and his behavior as long as he was worth it.

I also think there is a difference between being critical and offer constructive criticism and talking badly about your employer. Not saying that Sitton or Woodson crossed it. But if I bad mouth my boss in an interview that won't help my career.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TransientTexan


Joined: 27 Jul 2014
Posts: 566
Location: Connecticut
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 12:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Woodson and Sitton situations are apples & oranges. Woodson was already 36 yrs old and his play had already declined to the point of GB taking him out of the boundary CB role. With a $10 mil cap number, his release was not surprising at all, regardless of his comments.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
{Family Ghost}


Joined: 08 Jun 2010
Posts: 2866
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 1:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gizmo2012 wrote:
{Family Ghost} wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
By cutting Sitton we picked up 6ish million in cap space next year. We also get the chance to see which of our young lineman are worth keeping around.

By letting Sitton play out the season, we get a year of Sitton and (we probably pick up a 4th/5th round comp pick for the 2018 draft. Trying to find more info on this. His age/accrued seasons brings things into question.) We also are stuck approximating the production for the younger lineman.

+++++++++++

I would've kept him.


It would be easier to stomach if we would have been able to get a 4th or 5th round draft pick for his services .. this year preferably, or at worst after the 16' season. Thompson is all about value and in this case he kind of blew it and will get no compensation. I don't know when they started shopping Sitton, but I would have thought they would have gotten something if they would have done it several months back.


Obviously Sitton crossed a line that 'compensation be dammed' according to TT. If it keeps the family more together in the long run then so be it. I, for one, will not criticize TT for what had to be an extremely difficult decision.


I'm going to fault Thompson for indecision. As soon as the season ended they could have started gauging trade value for Sitton, but didn't do that until way late in the game .. the very end of training camp. Thompson probably already had a pretty good idea of who he wanted around post 2015/16. On March 8th he locked up Lane Taylor for a couple years, so he was already making plans for his line at that point.

In the draft he had added two more players. Perhaps they wanted to see Lane Taylor prove it one more offseason, but to sign him in March they pretty much were already sold. The only good reason for waiting until the end of camp on the Sitton decison is to make sure there no serious injuries in training camp. Lang was coming off a surgery, so that was a concern.

Oh well, the decision is done and over with. The early results are that Taylor can play at this level .. he's been good in a few NFL starts now. He's going to struggle, but there is a decent chance by years end that he will be considered a solid starter. Sitton couldn't ascend any further, and probably was going to start to regress. I think Sitton is the better player for sure, but the gap might not be all that great by years end. Lets hope for that at least.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheOnlyThing


Joined: 01 Sep 2015
Posts: 842
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 1:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TransientTexan wrote:
The Woodson and Sitton situations are apples & oranges. Woodson was already 36 yrs old and his play had already declined to the point of GB taking him out of the boundary CB role. With a $10 mil cap number, his release was not surprising at all, regardless of his comments.


Woodson was converted to Safety in 2012. He was not a boundary CB.

No one thought Woodson would return in 2013 at his $10M cap number. However, he was not given the option of restructuring his contract and returning at a reduced number that more accurately reflected his play as was say a player like AJ Hawk.

Woodson was certainly old when he was let go, but his leadership abilities and veteran savvy brought benefits that offset his declining athleticism.

It is possible that Woodson's departure was completely unrelated to his highly unusual, for a Packer player, propensity to call out coaches/management.

I will say that Lane Taylor did more yesterday to instill hope that he can adequately replace Sitton than Jennings/McMillian ever did when they replaced Woodson.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TransientTexan


Joined: 27 Jul 2014
Posts: 566
Location: Connecticut
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 3:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TheOnlyThing wrote:
TransientTexan wrote:
The Woodson and Sitton situations are apples & oranges. Woodson was already 36 yrs old and his play had already declined to the point of GB taking him out of the boundary CB role. With a $10 mil cap number, his release was not surprising at all, regardless of his comments.


Woodson was converted to Safety in 2012. He was not a boundary CB.

No one thought Woodson would return in 2013 at his $10M cap number. However, he was not given the option of restructuring his contract and returning at a reduced number that more accurately reflected his play as was say a player like AJ Hawk.

Woodson was certainly old when he was let go, but his leadership abilities and veteran savvy brought benefits that offset his declining athleticism.

It is possible that Woodson's departure was completely unrelated to his highly unusual, for a Packer player, propensity to call out coaches/management.

I will say that Lane Taylor did more yesterday to instill hope that he can adequately replace Sitton than Jennings/McMillian ever did when they replaced Woodson.
I never said he was a boundary CB in 2012. I said he had already been (past tense) converted away from that role (which he had played during his earlier years in GB). Mcmillian did ok as a rookie in part-time duty so it's entirely possible that they had mistakenly believed he could be a passable starter at safety.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 65, 66, 67
Page 67 of 67

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group