Screw these damn multi-millionaire prima donnas! And the NFL too, for that matter. I stay a Packer fan despite all this salary crap. I just shelled out a couple hundred retirement bucks for the NFL Sunday Ticket. Maybe I'm the fool. :bang:
Printable View
Screw these damn multi-millionaire prima donnas! And the NFL too, for that matter. I stay a Packer fan despite all this salary crap. I just shelled out a couple hundred retirement bucks for the NFL Sunday Ticket. Maybe I'm the fool. :bang:
I don't know, although the Bears game was on here (damned Fibs) I could not bear to watch it so I missed Sitton's performance. Was the USA article taken from the Tribune? In any case, whether or not Sitton was outstanding yesterday doesn't matter because: (1) with his injury history he's probably not going to be outstanding for the entire year; (2) he never practices, which probably counts as a big minus for MM, who seems to value the number of reps this unit can get together; (3) by cutting Sitton now rather than waiting you both remove whatever negative influence he had on your younger linemen and you give someone or someones a head-start on development, which will be a plus when next year rolls around. One thing about TT is that he never ever seems to go into absolute must win now mode; for better or worse he's always thinking about how decisions made now will affect the future. He's the anti-Sherman.
it kinda seems obvious that we had to cut sitton so we could make our average LT the 4th highest paid LT in the NFL
we were just saying 2 days ago that 8 to 10 million a year would be too much for him. 8 would put him in the top 15 and 10 would put him in the top 10
i suppose we're probably about ready to give tretter 8-9 million per year too
and langs probably going to get what sitton got if not more
JustinH made a good point, because this is an extension of his current deal, he will average $10 mil per year for those 5 years. So he is getting Top 10 money, not Top 5.
Plus all numbers so far are the hyped agent top line numbers. I bet the Packers are protected in this.
3 guards make over 10 million a year
guards 4,5,6,7 are around 8 million
8,9,10 are around 7 mill
11-15 are 6.6 million to 5.3 million
centers
the top 5 make between 8.8 and 9.4 million
#6 makes 8.3
7 and 8 make about 7.5
9 and 10 are around 6.3
so a quick rough guess has tretter at 6.5 to 9 million probably
and lang maybe at 7-8 maybe
add in bahks 10, and bulagas 7 or so. thats a ton of money for the o-line
like i said somewhere on here, we could let lang and bulaga go, or all 3 if tretter costs that much too
then we're back to square one and rebuilding the line
They were going to have to rebuild the OL either way. They made the decision that they liked Bahk quite a bit more than Sitton, and the money they saved by cutting Sitton did help to resign Bahk. In that respect I can't say that I blame them. A lot rides on Taylor. If he turns out to be solid, it's a good decision. It would have allowed them to retain their good, young LT and have an affordable option at LG. It gives them options too. They could resign Tretter or Lang or they can kick Bulaga inside.
They didn't use a 2nd and 4th round pick on Spriggs for him to be a backup. Gotta believe he'll be the RT. That would mean 1 of 4 things:
Bulaga is gone
Lang is gone and Bulaga moves to RG
Bulaga moves to LG, Lang stays at RG and Taylor becomes backup.
Lang is gone, Bulaga moves to LG and Taylor moves to RG.
Seems to me they want to re-up Tretter. He's versatile and talented. So I think they'll go after him, then move to the defensive side of the ball to see if Perry and/or Jones is worth locking up. If they sign one or both, then they can use any chump change to see if Lang will bite.
A lot of options. It's too early for me to have much of an opinion yet. It would be a ton of money being spent on the o-line but I think I'd rather see them sign Tretter and Lang than Tretter and Lacy. There's no clear succession plan behind Lacy other than Starks for another year and a bunch of questions but I'd still prefer to keep the line solid and get a RB in the draft if the UDFA's don't develop. Homer Alert: I think both Pressley and Don Jackson have a chance next year. Pressley has decent size and obviously can fly and I liked Jackson better than Burks going into camp. He's a bit undersized but that dude runs with some attitude.
Why do we think we wouldn't leave Bulaga at RT where he was a first round pick? Seems to me that Spriggs will have to earn a spot. Backup tackle appears to be his best position. He'll get in a few games at tackle when Bulaga inevitably goes down.
I think you throw draft slots out the window at this point and get your best line on the field. That may be with Spriggs at RT who's probably more nimble and long though not as strong (prototypical Tackle) as Bulaga at this stage, who's knees maybe will project him inside at some point, but that'll play itself out in good time. As you say beveaux Spriggs needs to develop and has a lot to prove yet. I think he has the tools and will develop into a starting Tackle.
Bulaga has played all 16 games once, that was his rookie year where he had 12 starts in place of Tauscher.
Last year he missed four games (2015) and the year before that (2014) he missed one.
The first significant clue emerges about why Sitton was cut late:
He signed the deal Saturday the 10th. Two weeks before that is August 27th. That is one week before Sitton was cut and according to Bob McGinn, when the Packers realized they would need to do something.Quote:
“It was interesting. It was about a two-week long process, which was mind-boggling to me considering what I thought we had to get done,” Bakhtiari said in an interview on ESPN Wisconsin’s “Wilde & Tausch” that is set to air this morning. “But I’m very fortunate that the Packers were able to work with me (and we) were able to get it done and we were able to sign it the night before the game.”
https://t.co/am4iUCggzI
Even as a rookie, Bulaga was hampered by injuries. He was getting worked at LG with the starters and looked to have a real shot at replacing Colledge in TC, and then hurt his hip the last 10 days or so and missed the final exhibition game. As a result MM stayed with Colledge.
bump
this topic needs further discussion and speculation
TT was right to let Rivera go but should have tried to find a way to keep Wahle. Everything went downhill after Wahle left.
Wahle had his issues with Sherman, and stated that money wasn't the only reason he left. I don't think TT could have kept Wahle unless he was going to immediately fire Sherman. History would suggest maybe he should have done that, but that would have been a tough call. Sherman was a popular coach who had never had a losing season.
Goddammit, If Lee had followed up after Manassas and chased the Union Army down, everything would be different now.
Nothing like a trip down memory lane.
Aaron Taylor, Adam Timmerman; Marco Rivera, Mike Wahle; Josh Sitton, TJ Lang. Departed guards seem to travel in pairs.
And most did not perform at a high level for too long after they left Green Bay. Timmerman was the only guy who had more than 1-2 good years, if I recall...but he was also considerably younger than most of the other guys too.
Signing 30 year old guards to any kind of free agency deal is MORONIC.
Zimmerman got a nice second contract from the Rams while the Packers were juggling some big contracts at the end of the Super Bowl run. He left early compared to most successful Packer draft picks.
Though Wolf didn't consider Guard to be like DE/QB/CB necessities either. He went through a lot of retreads before finding Timmerman.
I think the 4 most undervalued positions in TTs NFL are G, ILB, RB, and maybe S. Although I think we will pay to keep our present safeties.