2016 Cut-downs

D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
That is one of the aspects of this move that is most puzzling to me, was it predetermined that the Packers were going to cut Sitton? Did they try to trade him prior to yesterday? If this plan was in the works for awhile, was the regular season starting OL ever on the field together in preseason?

I don't understand the timing of Sitton's release at all. The starting offensive line entering the season will only have oracticed together for a single week, not having lined up in that formation during the preseason at all.

If Thompson thought about that move for a while why not cut him before the start of offseason practices???
 

bigbubbatd

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2015
Messages
1,679
Reaction score
166
It seems like Taylor makes the most sense now. I would be surprised if he isn't the starting guard opposite Lang opening day. That said I think one of the centers or a Spriggs and Bulaga pairing could also be a possibility if Taylor falters
 

bigbubbatd

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2015
Messages
1,679
Reaction score
166
I don't understand the timing of Sitton's release at all. The starting offensive line entering the season will only have oracticed together for a single week, not having lined up in that formation during the preseason at all.

If Thompson thought about that move for a while why not cut him before the start of offseason practices???

That is my question too. The couple scenarios I can see are

1. They were trying to trade Sitton. For a while but just couldn't get a deal done. This seems odd though if Sitton really is drawing this much interest
2. Sitton came into camp looking good but the team noticed his playing slipping over the course of practices or they noticed him favoring his back again

Also Taylor has had a ton of time with the number ones with all the practice time the guards have missed due to injury so I am not sure it is a huge issue
 

brandon2348

GO PACK GO!
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
5,342
Reaction score
339
I don't understand the timing of Sitton's release at all. The starting offensive line entering the season will only have oracticed together for a single week, not having lined up in that formation during the preseason at all.

If Thompson thought about that move for a while why not cut him before the start of offseason practices???

This is exactly right. This whole thing wreaks of a an "emotional decision". I have not heard one damn thing anywhere that makes any sense why he was let go a week before the season.

Watch him go to the Bears or Seahawks. "Salt in the wound."
 
Last edited:

bigbubbatd

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2015
Messages
1,679
Reaction score
166
This is exactly right. This whole thing wreaks of a an "emotional decision". I have not heard one dann thing anywhere that makes any sense why he was let go a week before the season.

Watch him go to the Bears or Seahawks. "Salt in the wound."
Yeah when I think of Ted Thompson I think of a guy who makes a lot of emotional decisions. He expresses so much emotion amd really wears his emotions on his sleeve
 

7thFloorRA

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
2,573
Reaction score
331
Location
Grafton, WI
That is my question too. The couple scenarios I can see are

1. They were trying to trade Sitton. For a while but just couldn't get a deal done. This seems odd though if Sitton really is drawing this much interest
2. Sitton came into camp looking good but the team noticed his playing slipping over the course of practices or they noticed him favoring his back again

Also Taylor has had a ton of time with the number ones with all the practice time the guards have missed due to injury so I am not sure it is a huge issue
He is drawing interest now that teams can determine his contract. They were not interested in picking up 5.9 mil the week before the season starts. Many teams probably don't even have that kind of cap space.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
It seems like Taylor makes the most sense now. I would be surprised if he isn't the starting guard opposite Lang opening day. That said I think one of the centers or a Spriggs and Bulaga pairing could also be a possibility if Taylor falters

I would prefer to line up a player at guard who has at least practiced at the position for most of the offseason.

Also Taylor has had a ton of time with the number ones with all the practice time the guards have missed due to injury so I am not sure it is a huge issue

Unfortunately Taylor hasn't proven being capable of performing at a high level.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
He is drawing interest now that teams can determine his contract. They were not interested in picking up 5.9 mil the week before the season starts. Many teams probably don't even have that kind of cap space.

The Packers could have tried to trade Sitton way earlier though if that was the plan all along.
 

JK64

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 29, 2014
Messages
1,088
Reaction score
272
I don't understand the timing of Sitton's release at all. The starting offensive line entering the season will only have oracticed together for a single week, not having lined up in that formation during the preseason at all.

If Thompson thought about that move for a while why not cut him before the start of offseason practices???

I'm agree, you know how I feel about the Oline and protecting Rodgers. Why cut Sitton, when there is no apparent replacement? This move really disappoints me.
 

brandon2348

GO PACK GO!
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
5,342
Reaction score
339
Yeah when I think of Ted Thompson I think of a guy who makes a lot of emotional decisions. He expresses so much emotion amd really wears his emotions on his sleeve

So explain why he already has over 10 teams interested in him? He is already working out for the Bears?

Why did TT get nothing?
 

jrock645

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 1, 2016
Messages
266
Reaction score
10
This 53 puzzles me. 6 safeties? cutting barrington? Obviously one more person is set to get cut, but it just seems like an odd mix at the moment. We shall see.
 

7thFloorRA

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
2,573
Reaction score
331
Location
Grafton, WI
This 53 puzzles me. 6 safeties? cutting barrington? Obviously one more person is set to get cut, but it just seems like an odd mix at the moment. We shall see.
I am anticipating a DL and RB to be signed and a S and CB and Burks to all be cut today or tomorrow.
 

jrock645

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 1, 2016
Messages
266
Reaction score
10
Oh and Brandon burks at RB? And no Sitton?

Most years the 53 makes a lot of sense and doesn't surprise me. But this year is just plain weird to me.
 

jrock645

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 1, 2016
Messages
266
Reaction score
10
I am anticipating a DL and RB to be signed and a S and CB and Burks to all be cut today or tomorrow.

I don't think they can cut a CB unless they sign one, need 6 there. Safety is definitely a cut.

And why keep Burks after a 2.6 average? RB's are rarely special teams studs, so it can't be that. Like I said, just a weird setup.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
If Thompson thought about that move for a while why not cut him before the start of offseason practices???
"Thought about it" and "decided upon it" are two different things.

Let's assume for the moment that the question was narrowed down to "Taylor (relatively cheap but is he adquate?) vs. Sitton (is he adequately recovered from wear and tear? and cap savings for carryover to next year). There is evidence to believe this is the case since Taylor worked at LG in preseason.

Then Sitton becomes a Goodson-like situation...there is little advantage to cutting him before they did. In fact the only advantage would have been avoiding $300,000 roster bonus dead cap hit, a small price to pay if it turned out they were not happy with Taylor as they worked through camp or if Taylor had been injured. Or perhaps they were looking to have Taylor and Tretter compete for the job which was derailed when it became evident Linsley would not be able to play. That would require a more extended look at Taylor before letting Sitton walk.

Another factor might be contract discussions with other players. It's been reported that Sitton was unhappy that he was excluded from contract extension discussions. Who with? Nobody has signed one yet. But with discussions taking place, the Packers probably have some inkling now of what these several 2017 FA O-Linemen will cost which they did not have earlier, and it's a fair assumption the numbers are not adding up.

It's been speculated by some that the Packers may have asked Sitton to take a pay cut. Perhaps, but that would likely have been asked and declined some weeks ago and would not have factored into the late decision.

I'm not happy with the move since it has been my thinking going back over a year ago that 2015/2016 was the prime window. This is compounded by the fact that I see Taylor stinking it up, very inconsistent.

I temper that with my oft-repeated formulation: winning comes down to having the roster play above the cap cost. That would have been a higher bar for Sitton than for Taylor. That will be a small consolation if Taylor keeps missing second level run blocks and shows himself to be turnstile in the passing game, an outcome which is clearly possible based on past performance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Vrill

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 1, 2011
Messages
1,803
Reaction score
137
My guess on why we are keeping so many DB's, is overall team speed on special teams.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
I don't think they can cut a CB unless they sign one, need 6 there. Safety is definitely a cut.

And why keep Burks after a 2.6 average? RB's are rarely special teams studs, so it can't be that. Like I said, just a weird setup.
Counting Hyde as a CB, there are 7 on the roster. Banjo is strictly a ST guy, leaving 4 safeties plus Hyde as a swing man.

Dorleant to PS makes sense. Hyde will be gone to free agency next season so keeping the 2 rookie safeties to see which, or whether either, wins the #3 spot next season makes sense. It doesn't hurt that those 2 safeties showed better than Dorleant in preseason.

Cutting Banjo is a possibility if his injury prevents him from playing out of the gate. Other than that, he should stick as a core special teamer.
 

bigbubbatd

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2015
Messages
1,679
Reaction score
166
I would prefer to line up a player at guard who has at least practiced at the position for most of the offseason.



Unfortunately Taylor hasn't proven being capable of performing at a high level.
I agree with what you are saying. I don't like cutting Sitton but i do know I don't have the insight into the why. I know this wasn't just a TT decision either. I hope Taylor steps up and I hope the staff didn't make the wrong decision
 

Snoops

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 14, 2014
Messages
1,615
Reaction score
279
Looks like sittons first visit is with our rivals.. The Bears if he leaves without a contract his second visit is with saints it's gonna be one of them two more than likely the Bears.. They need help on there line... The move still baffles me because if we kept him we would have gotten a comp pick for him after the yr Ted loves them picks it would be a good one I guess I understand the cap savings if that was the real reason
 

sjb12681

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
563
Reaction score
103
Location
Carmel, Indiana
When the bears sign him to a 1 yr 6 million$ contract then I will question why TT didn't get anything.
Agreed. Posters are looking at this in a bubble. If I am a GM, and news leaks that a player will be cut or traded, I am not going to be too keen on trading valuable draft picks for a 1 yr rental and "rights to negotiate" for 6mm, when I can keep my picks, and take my chance at signing a player at a more reasonable LONGER term deal.
 

7thFloorRA

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
2,573
Reaction score
331
Location
Grafton, WI
The bears? Are they really that inept at drafting. Pace has to have set a record for free agent signings. I will never understand their team building philosophy.
 
OP
OP
Pkrjones

Pkrjones

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 3, 2014
Messages
4,227
Reaction score
2,087
Location
Northern IL
Bears recently did a similar head-scratcher...cutting Matt Slauson who I believe is starting in SD. Probably more "dynamics" involved in locker & negotiation rooms than we'll ever be privvy to.
 

Carl

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 6, 2013
Messages
3,073
Reaction score
272
Location
Madison, Wisconsin
"The Packers claimed Vikings running back Jhurell Pressley off waivers. The team is planning to use Pressley – who had a 28-yard receiving touchdown and a 106-yard kick return – as a third-down back, and is flying him to Green Bay today."

From ESPN Twitter
 

Ogsponge

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 29, 2013
Messages
1,501
Reaction score
291
Location
Wisconsin
I still consider the Packers one of the favorites to win the Super Bowl.

Another reason releasing Sitton is mind-boggling though is that currently the team doesn't have a single backup best suited to play guard.
I certainly agree they have a much better chance than most to do so, however, I am still concerned about a defensive unit that seems to always have some sort of really bad meltdown in the playoffs and/or an offense that for whatever reason continually underperforms against the other top tier teams.

And yes, my main point about releasing Sitton is it simply makes the team worse, how much worse is the question, hopefully not much but it is concerning to me at least.
 
Top