All Sitton & Lang & OL threads merged

[Poppa San]

http://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2...n-release-about-more-than-just-money-nfl-2016

More speculation by a reporter. Nothing more than what is in this thread. Just done by a "professional."

 

[Sky King]

Click on the link to the Packer team site and go to the roster: http://www.packers.com/team/players.html
http://www.packers.com/team/players.html
Then at the top of the "Active" roster click on "Age" to sort the players by their ages. Note the ages of the starters and envision for yourself the kind of turnover that could take place within the next few years. Form your own armchair GM conclusions as to what will happen when a starter's contract, performance, physical condition and age all intersect.

I'll always remember a story that Brian Noble, LB, told about a conversation that he once had with Ron Wolf. To paraphrase, Wolf is alleged to have told Noble, "I love you to death but I'm constantly looking for someone to replace you." This is not a sentimental business.

 

[PikeBadger]

Click on the link to the Packer team site and go to the roster:
http://www.packers.com/team/players.html
Then at the top of the "Active" roster click on "Age" to sort the players by their ages. Note the ages of the starters and envision for yourself the kind of turnover that could take place within the next few years. Form your own armchair GM conclusions as to what will happen when a starter's contract, performance, physical condition and age all intersect.

I'll always remember a story that Brian Noble, LB, told about a conversation that he once had with Ron Wolf. To paraphrase, Wolf is alleged to have told Noble, "I love you to death but I'm constantly looking for someone to replace you." This is not a sentimental business.

I think a lot of fans get attached to the best players and their favorite players and find such an unceremonius departure offensive which is one reason why they lash out at management. I must admit that I was once this way as well. I was brokenhearted and angry when the Braves traded Eddie Mathews after the 1965 season. Today and for probably the last 25 years, my attitude is meh, players come and players go but the Green Bay Packers live forever. It doesn't bother me one iota to see any of these players retire, get traded, or get released. I view all of them as being expendable and replaceable. I'm actually looking forward to the turnover that has just begun with the departure of Raji, Kuhn and Sitton. Next year is likely to see us replace Peppers, Lacy and Lang.

 

[adambr2]

I don't think many people are disappointed to see Sitton go based on personal attachment. I think in his case it has a lot more to do with performance.

While I don't deny that what you are talking about exists among fans, I personally don't get too attached to individual players, much like yourself.

I admit it was a bit of an adjustment not seeing Favre under center in 2008, but I fully supported Thompson in that move. I don't see many similarities between that situation and this one, and again, I don't think that's why people are upset about Sitton. I mean, Donald Driver was one of the most beloved Packers of this era, and people were sad to see him go, but for the most part, they got it -- he just wasn't productive enough anymore. Sitton was.

I am certain that some explanation exists and this move wasn't done on a whim, but it doesn't mean that the explanation would convince me that it was a good move. Given Sitton's history with this team and reputation it's very difficult for me to believe that he was any sort of locker room distraction.

I am not in denial of this move, I have accepted it and will continue to root for the Packers to reach the Super Bowl, and will root for the success of Lane Taylor or any LG for the Packers this year. That said I certainly feel much less confident in the composition of our offensive line than I did a week ago.

So in the absence of a reasonable explanation (or any explanation, for that matter), I'll continue to think this was a poor move. I mean, come on, I think there were 2 people (Pike and Scotland, I believe) who even hinted prior to this move that something like this could happen. Most of the rest of us, if we were told a week ago Sitton would be cut, would have thought that was insane. I still think it was. Anyone besides the aforementioned two that doesn't think it was now, is simply rationalizing after the fact that since Thompson actually did it, it must not be so crazy.

Hey, if you want to give him the benefit of the doubt, that's your right. But those who think it was a mistake still have a right not to, as well.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

My eyes saw the same thing. I still don't think he played as well last year as he has in the past. I yelled at him more last year than I ever have.

Sitton's performance might have declined a bit last season but there's no doubt he still was one of the top guards in the league. Unfortunately Taylor has a long way to go before playing on a level like that.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The Packers were bad in short yardage last year. I'm not saying that was Sitton's fault but I do recall reading that his run blocking left something to be desired (although his pass blocking was stellar) Perhaps the Packers are determined to change that short yardage ranking this year. If so one way to do it would be to improve your line's ability to run block. If that is the case replacing Sitton, whose ability to run block is suspect, with Taylor, who the coaches think can run block better makes sense.

If this is the case, Taylor is better at run blocking than Sitton, we can only hope the gain we get in that area is not wiped out by the loss we experience in some other area (pass blocking for example)

Unfortunately Taylor isn't better than Sitton blocking for the run.

I'm truly surprised by several posters coming up with random explanations as to why Taylor is capable of adequately replacing Sitton.

I would like you and the others to answer a simple question. If Sitton was still on the Packers would you be fine with Taylor starting ahead of him???

I guess that as long as you're being honest there's no way Packers fans would feel comfortable with the move and would harshly criticize and question McCarthy's decision because of the significant drop-off in performance.

In my opinion you're being in denial acting like the offensive line will be able to perform on the same level with Taylor replacing Sitton.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Obviously the team's general manager felt it was necessary to release Sitton or he wouldn't have done it. Just because you say there was no necessity does not mean that is the case.

Just because Thompson felt the necessity to release Sitton doesn't mean he was right about it either. Remember his plan to replace Woodson with Jennings or McMillian???

Very interesting and makes senses. I bet Lang is going to follow him out the door after the season. The injury thing is a double edged sword with him too. One one had you have him gutting it out with all these chronic injuries the last few years....on the other hand the guy didn't practice for 2 months. That should be a huge red flag that you need to work on replacing him. The back and foot injuries are going to be around forever.

I expected the Packers not to offer Sitton a contract after this season because of his injury history and the limited cap space available. I don't agree with releasing him without having an adequate replacement on the roster.

I think a lot of fans get attached to the best players and their favorite players and find such an unceremonius departure offensive which is one reason why they lash out at management. I must admit that I was once this way as well. I was brokenhearted and angry when the Braves traded Eddie Mathews after the 1965 season. Today and for probably the last 25 years, my attitude is meh, players come and players go but the Green Bay Packers live forever. It doesn't bother me one iota to see any of these players retire, get traded, or get released. I view all of them as being expendable and replaceable. I'm actually looking forward to the turnover that has just begun with the departure of Raji, Kuhn and Sitton. Next year is likely to see us replace Peppers, Lacy and Lang.

I'm not disappointed about Sitton being released because of a personal attachment to him. The reason I'm concerned about the move is the lack of another offensive lineman being able to perform on the same level as him as well as not having a single backup best suited to play guard on the roster.

 

[Curly Calhoun]

My eyes saw the same thing. I still don't think he played as well last year as he has in the past. I yelled at him more last year than I ever have.

I think he's still pretty good, but obviously age and a bad back are going to have some effect. No shame in that, it happens to the best of us.......

 

[PikeBadger]

I don't think many people are disappointed to see Sitton go based on personal attachment. I think in his case it has a lot more to do with performance.

While I don't deny that what you are talking about exists among fans, I personally don't get too attached to individual players, much like yourself.

I admit it was a bit of an adjustment not seeing Favre under center in 2008, but I fully supported Thompson in that move. I don't see many similarities between that situation and this one, and again, I don't think that's why people are upset about Sitton. I mean, Donald Driver was one of the most beloved Packers of this era, and people were sad to see him go, but for the most part, they got it -- he just wasn't productive enough anymore. Sitton was.

I am certain that some explanation exists and this move wasn't done on a whim, but it doesn't mean that the explanation would convince me that it was a good move. Given Sitton's history with this team and reputation it's very difficult for me to believe that he was any sort of locker room distraction.

I am not in denial of this move, I have accepted it and will continue to root for the Packers to reach the Super Bowl, and will root for the success of Lane Taylor or any LG for the Packers this year. That said I certainly feel much less confident in the composition of our offensive line than I did a week ago.

So in the absence of a reasonable explanation (or any explanation, for that matter), I'll continue to think this was a poor move. I mean, come on, I think there were 2 people (Pike and Scotland, I believe) who even hinted prior to this move that something like this could happen. Most of the rest of us, if we were told a week ago Sitton would be cut, would have thought that was insane. I still think it was. Anyone besides the aforementioned two that doesn't think it was now, is simply rationalizing after the fact that since Thompson actually did it, it must not be so crazy.

Hey, if you want to give him the benefit of the doubt, that's your right. But those who think it was a mistake still have a right not to, as well.

Well written post. I like it especially that there wasn't any venom injected. I fully respect your clear and rational thoughts and explanation here.

Driver - He was with the team a lot longer than I expected. I was forecasting his release/trade three years prior to it actually happening. The guy's staying power was amazing. He apparently took very good care of his body to play as long as he did.

 

[HardRightEdge]

...ah, to hell with it.

Come Sunday, that's where it's at. That should be the locker room attitude, and the O-Line's attitude when they walk on the field. They say "it's a business". Now they have to believe it.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

One aspect of the Sitton "deal" that would make how it happened more plausible to me, is if the Packers and Sitton already knew this was most likely his final year in GB and how that news was sitting with Josh. If the Packers had made it pretty clear that he was low man on the totem pole in contract negotiations and this upset Josh enough to the point that he was showing signs of a "disgruntled employee", TT and Co. may have decided they didn't want that attitude on the field or in the locker room. Especially around Lang and Bahk who they may have decided were more important to sign.

If that was the case, it will be a good lesson to the Packers in the future not to reveal their hands to players or their agents and if Josh was acting like a spoiled child, good luck to him.

 

[longtimefan]

Hippa laws, if back and toe are bad we dont have any legal right to know.

Big unit said how sitton was bragging his back was great. Bill thought it was odd the way he was explaining it. His take was sitton knew this was last year and he was promoting himself. And be doesn't believe his back and toe are not as good as he is letting on

 

[Mondio]

HIPPA doesn't apply the same under team dynamics. Generally team doctors report to the team, who can release as little or as much as they'd like concerning injuries. If Sitton was seeing doctors outside of the team, that doctor has no obligation to anybody but Sitton, and they could not release any information.

But I wouldn't expect a team with the professionalism of the Packers to release anything to undermine Sitton going forward just so their move looks better to fans.

 

[longtimefan]

HIPPA doesn't apply the same under team dynamics. Generally team doctors report to the team, who can release as little or as much as they'd like concerning injuries. If Sitton was seeing doctors outside of the team, that doctor has no obligation to anybody but Sitton, and they could not release any information.

But I wouldn't expect a team with the professionalism of the Packers to release anything to undermine Sitton going forward just so their move looks better to fans.

I have hard time believing a player has no say in what is released to the public.

I know for a fact last year rodgers knee was an issue after the charger game but they said nothing. They just never reported it

 

[longtimefan]

HIPPA doesn't apply the same under team dynamics. Generally team doctors report to the team, who can release as little or as much as they'd like concerning injuries. If Sitton was seeing doctors outside of the team, that doctor has no obligation to anybody but Sitton, and they could not release any information.

But I wouldn't expect a team with the professionalism of the Packers to release anything to undermine Sitton going forward just so their move looks better to fans.

I do know there is a loop hole for hippa and the nfl.

My point is peronally a player should have things held back if they want..

Rodgers knee is perfect example... The team doesnt report because he practices and plays . But it is an issue.

So if back is an issue and never reported to the league? (per big unit) hippa might play.. This was his opinion.

 

[Mondio]

I have hard time believing a player has no say in what is released to the public.

I know for a fact last year rodgers knee was an issue after the charger game but they said nothing. They just never reported it

i think teams would be wise to limit what they release purely out of respect, but unless the NFLPA has specific clauses in their league contract, doctors report to teams who are not bound by HIPPA.

I think most teams have keep their players privacy in mind.

 

[Half Empty]

Agree with your post. But I would add Campen to the list of those being asked by the Packers' front office. The only line above average he's fielded ( other than the one he inherited from Beightol) was in 2014. Last year demonstrated how shallow the depth of that line was; and very likely is today. It seems highly unlikely that this move will be advantageous to the football team's chance of improving this year.

I'm far from a Campen fan, but I do think some note has to be taken of the material with which he's been provided. Haven't put down all the numbers, but I think the draft status of Packer OLinemen for some time has been surprising low.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I do know there is a loop hole for hippa and the nfl.

Certainly there is, under the collective bargaining agreement. All you have to do is look at the weekly pregame injury reports like this: http://www.packers.com/team/injury-report.html

The NFL requires pregame injury reporting.

Or how about the fact injuries are discussed or leaked...Nelson injures the other knee, for example.

Forget HIPPA; it's not in play.

Lack of specifics as to the nature of the injury or it's severity is the result of either (1) not knowing, such as when treatment is in process; how it responds remains to be seen, including the players tolerance for pain or (2) there is a competitive disadvantage in disclosure when the guy is borderline and taking the field.

As for point (2), Tramon Williams is a good example. It was said he was recovered from the shoulder injury with no residual nerve damage. A season later, when the shoulder nerve damage was fully healed (or at least not an impediment), then he admitted that, yeah, it wasn't actually 100%. You don't want the opponent to know where you're at if you can keep it under the mandatory reporting threshold. Not that it mattered much since Williams' press corner duty was turned over to Shields making it kind of obvious. But since there is no advantage in disclosure, why do it even if it may not matter?

 

[mradtke66]

Unfortunately Taylor isn't better than Sitton blocking for the run.

I'm digging it up now, because I didn't think to save it, but someone reported that while Sitton is a rock, he's been unable to effectively drive block in the run game, presumably due to his back. Unsure if I found it on ESPN, JS, or whatever. It is possible that Taylor is a better run blocker than Sitton, if only due to health.

I'll edit this if/when I can find the story.

 

[C-Lee]

TT is a fool for this one. Very frustrating and brought a down vibe going into the new season.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

TT is a fool for this one. Very frustrating and brought a down vibe going into the new season.

while you might be right about the initial shock to fans and teammates, the move may also have been made to curtail any negative vibes down the road. While I think the Packers cost themselves a trade (draft choice) with the timing of the move, I have to trust the Packer decision makers were looking at the long range ramifications of this move, to make this kind of major decision when they did.

 

[rodell330]

Lane Taylor tho? seriously? i'm still waiting for Ashton Kutcher to pop out and tell us that we all got punk'd.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

while you might be right about the initial shock to fans and teammates, the move may also have been made to curtail any negative vibes down the road.

I'm not sold on Sitton being disappointed about the Packers not offering him a contract would have been that bad of an influence as some of you believe. In my opinion the team's locker room would and should have been able to handle one disgruntled player.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'm not sold on Sitton being disappointed about the Packers not offering him a contract would have been that bad of an influence as some of you believe. In my opinion the team's locker room would and should have been able to handle one disgruntled player.

Obviously, without more then the very little we have heard from the Packers or Sitton, everything said here and around the football world about the situation is purely speculation. Probably most of it being based on "I heard" or "I think". One thing I am pretty sure of though and this was confirmed by MM the other day when talking about the Sitton decision, the locker room is a very important place in the Packer organization, as is team chemistry. So whether this was a factor in the Sitton decision, we may never know. While I agree with you that a locker room should be able to handle a disgruntled player, based on past history in GB, I think that when given a choice, the Packer organization tries to avoid it at all costs.

 

[rodell330]

I'm not buying the "locker room" thing either. I'm pretty sure, that Sitton hasn't been the only "disgruntled" (if that were even true) Packer player in the locker room. I'm more inclined to believe it had more to do with his back and foot injuries. Altho i remember Woodson having an issue with how Capers managed the San Fran playoff loss and being cut while he was still under contract. Thing's that make you go hmmmm??