Josh Sitton.

[vince]

I was at work today ripping through some tweets taking a short respite and I ran across this tweet.

Jordan Schultz (@Schultz_Report) tweeted at 4:06 PM on Mon, Sep 12, 2016:
Sources inside the Packers locker room tell me the Josh Sitton situation was "combustible at best." A confrontation w/Clinton-Dix got racial
(https://twitter.com/Schultz_Report/s...674498560?s=09)

I emailed it to my personal address so I wouldn't have to go searching for it later in case I get a chance to post it. I came back to it tonight and the tweet has been deleted.

I read this also happened to Schefter's tweet last week about the same subject.

I believe the Packers are actively covering up any sniff of non-football related controversy about Sitton so it doesn't escalate into a bigger, possibly uncontrollable distraction for this season. They are being purposely vague and willing to allow speculation derogatory towards them about how this is a financial decision (it's not), a question of Sitton's back or anything else EXCEPT the reason(s) he was cut and that has to do with keeping the team together - not divided - for the season at hand, which as Dougherty's source said Sitton had threatened to do through his outspoken and disparaging remarks about coaching and/or other players.

[Harlan Huckleby]

http://bearswire.usatoday.com/2016/09/11/studs-and-duds-from-chicago-bears-23-14-loss-to-houston-texans/

Sitton cited as one of two studs for Bears Sunday

[pbmax]

They were so oblivious to it that the younger ones were starting to internalize it, like a second nature. Why on cutdown day? I can think of three possible reasons. Something happened on the order of a last straw. They were trying to trade him and found no takers and finally had to give up. Or they were holding onto him long enough that some teams would have already committed and would have a harder time competing for him on the FA market. The last possibility is the most devious and therefore the most interesting.

You can put points one and two together. They were aware of it, but thought it could be handled as it was handled for 8 years.

Until this camp showed that the other lineman were truly following his lead. In this scenario, Sitton does nothing different. One of his buddies does.

[pbmax]

I was at work today ripping through some tweets taking a short respite and I ran across this tweet.


I emailed it to my personal address so I wouldn't have to go searching for it later in case I get a chance to post it. I came back to it tonight and the tweet has been deleted.

I read this also happened to Schefter's tweet last week about the same subject.

I believe the Packers are actively covering up any sniff of non-football related controversy about Sitton so it doesn't escalate into a bigger, possibly uncontrollable distraction for this season. They are being purposely vague and willing to allow speculation derogatory towards them about how this is a financial decision (it's not), a question of Sitton's back or anything else EXCEPT the reason(s) he was cut and that has to do with keeping the team together - not divided - for the season at hand, which as Dougherty's source said Sitton had threatened to do through his outspoken and disparaging remarks about coaching and/or other players.

No snark: Who is Jordan Schultz?

Can you pass along the link that Adam Schefter deleted a report/Tweet?

Clinton Dix got into an argument with another defender last year on the sideline, so its not atypical for him to react. But still pretty sketchy.

[vince]

Jordan Schultz is a sports reporter for the Huffington Post.

The Schefter tweet was ascerted by a poster on another board who indicated he saw it and then it was gone. I didn't see that one, but the claim is consistent with this one.

I see Gary referred to this same situation above so it's been asserted prior to this.

[vince]

There's not going to be definitive proof of anything. The Packers and all parties involved in any alleged incidents have ample motivation to sweep it under the rug, deny, deny, deny, and hopefully get past it as quickly as possible. There will always be plausible deniability so everyone can continue to believe what they are predisposed to believing and the world will move right along.

I just think it's the most logical and likely situation based on everything we know about the parties involved and the facts that we do know about Sitton's release.

[pbmax]

I dunno. The HaHa rumor just seems like a slightly more logical proposal on the Barrington rumor. HaHa had a public confrontation with a teammate. Makes it immediately more believable.

[red]

I dunno. The HaHa rumor just seems like a slightly more logical proposal on the Barrington rumor. HaHa had a public confrontation with a teammate. Makes it immediately more believable.

thats what i was thinking, the haha deal sounds just like the one from last week about barrington

and why wouldnt haha get punished? if it was just one sided why would guys like daniels and TT call him a good guy?

[vince]

I didn't see anything credibly sourced about Barrington, just speculation. There was Chmura, Schultz, supposedly Schefter sourcing some "sensitive" incident, and multiple reports about his general outspoken, opinionated and divisive nature that either was or threatened to spill over to undermine team unity.

As to why people on or associated with the team would try to divert attention away from controversy- I'd say that's easy to understand.

Again, I realize that these allegations are speculative and unproven and what we know for sure doesn't corroborate them. I personally don't see Sitton getting cut at the 11th hour like he did happening based on what we do know.

[Patler]

thats what i was thinking, the haha deal sounds just like the one from last week about barrington

and why wouldnt haha get punished? if it was just one sided why would guys like daniels and TT call him a good guy?

I think it was Wilde who said the rumor was that the incident involved Barrington, Dix and a third player he didn't name. He said Dix denied it, he couldn't reach Barrington, and the third player denied that it ever happened, say if it had happened the world would have known about it because he would have beaten the crap out of Sitton for saying/doing it. (Does that sound a little like something Mike Daniels would say? )

[Pugger]

I agree, except that he typically does those things very, very early in the off season, or lets the player play out his contract and then he collects the draft pick compensation. Doing this last-minute as he did is not very TT-like at all.

I know I'm repeating myself but I find it perplexing Ted couldn't find one GM willing to make a deal for Josh.

[Cheesehead Craig]

I think this is the longest non-Favre thread we've had for a player.

[pbmax]

I think it was Wilde who said the rumor was that the incident involved Barrington, Dix and a third player he didn't name. He said Dix denied it, he couldn't reach Barrington, and the third player denied that it ever happened, say if it had happened the world would have known about it because he would have beaten the crap out of Sitton for saying/doing it. (Does that sound a little like something Mike Daniels would say? )

I thought Wilde said Sitton denied it outright?

[hoosier]

Who did HCD get into it with last year? Was that the shouting/pushing match on the sidelines with Raji and Peppers?

[vince]

I think it was Wilde who said the rumor was that the incident involved Barrington, Dix and a third player he didn't name. He said Dix denied it, he couldn't reach Barrington, and the third player denied that it ever happened, say if it had happened the world would have known about it because he would have beaten the crap out of Sitton for saying/doing it. (Does that sound a little like something Mike Daniels would say? )

I hadn't heard that. That connects some big (unverified) dots.