Quote Originally Posted by Patler View Post
Many reason, at least 6,850,000 of which were very tangible reasons. I doubt that the Packer brain trust thinks that the net result of this decision negatively impacts their SB aspirations significantly, or they wouldn't have done it. They have too long of a history of letting players play out their contracts. While they may have accepted decreased performance at LG to be one result, in their minds there are perhaps intangible benefits to offset it, and they are willing to accept the decrease in performance at LG as a result.

I have said before that usually I'm in the camp that appreciates Thompson looking after the long-term cap health of the team. However, in this case I disagree with moving on from Sitton - even if there are other reasons as well, such as the supposed disgruntled attitude.

You're weakening yourself at a position. I don't think many people disagree with this. And this year, as much or more than many, is a year in which your team appears to have a very real shot at getting to the NFCCG and perhaps to the SB. The team's health heading in is pretty good, you're getting an important defensive lineman back after four games, and you have your #1 WR back with what seems a very deep group. Your inside linebackers look moderately better than what you've had before (minus Clay), the secondary is deep, the running back looks better.

And the offensive line is key to any success. You have a line that's played together and has the opportunity to provide one of the league's best QB's the time to make plays, and the opportunity to open holes for what looks like an improved running back.

Now is not the time to look at next year and wonder how to spend an extra six mill. Now is the time to think about now, and use the comp pick you'll get next year to replace the player you won't be able to re-sign because you paid Sitton his six mill this year.